IN THE COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED 29.04.2011 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R. SUDHAKAR W.P.Nos.10767 of 2011 and M.P.Nos.1 and 2 of 2011 K.V.Ismail. ... Petitioner Vs. 1.The Assistant Director, Town Panchayat, Vellore Zone, Vellore-9. 2.The Executive Officer, Town Panchayat, Kanamangalam, Tiruvannamalai District. 3.K.Prakash. 4.The Junior Engineer, Electricity Board, Kannamangalam, Arni Taluk, Tiruvannamalai District. ... Respondents Writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents 1 and 2 to close the functioning of the Flour Mill of the third respondent in Door No.99/93, Old Bazar Street, Kannamangalam Town Panchayat, Arni Taluk, Tiruvannamalai District since the Flour Mill is within the prohibited distance as per G.O.Ms.No.754 dated 7.5.1979 and he is running the Mill without licence. For Petitioner : Mr.K.P.Kumar, For Respondents : Mr.S.Shivashanmugam Government Advocate for R1 and R2 : Mr.P.Srinivas, for R4 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ O R D E R Writ petition is filed praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents 1 and 2 to close the functioning of the Flour Mill of the third respondent in Door No.99/93, Old Bazar Street, Kannamangalam Town Panchayat, Arni Taluk, Tiruvannamalai District since the Flour Mill is within the prohibited distance as per G.O.Ms.No.754 dated 7.5.1979 and he is running the Mill without licence. 2. Mr.S.Shivashanmugam, learned Government Advocate takes notice on behalf of the respondents 1 and 2. Mr.P.Srinivas, learned counsel takes notice on behalf of the fourth respondent. In view the nature of order that is to be passed in this writ petition, the notice to the third respondent is dispensed with. By consent of all the parties, the writ petition is taken up for final disposal. 3. On the complaint dated 4.10.2010 made by the petitioner, a show-cause notice was issued to the third respondent by the second respondent on 2.11.2010. The grievance of the petitioner is that in spite of the proceedings initiated, the third respondent is continuing to run the rice-mill contrary to law and without proper licence. Petitioner has also given a representation on 13.11.2010. Since no action has been taken the writ petition has been filed. 4. Considering the above facts, the second respond respondent is directed to consider and the representation dated 13.11.2010 on its own merits and take suitable action in accordance with law, if warranted. Needless to state that if any action is taken and if the right of the third respondent will be affected, the authority is directed to follow the due process of law under the provisions of Act so as to avoid the allegation of violation of principles of natural justice. 5. The Writ Petition is disposed of as above. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed. Sd/- Asst. Registrar //true copy// Sub Asst.Registrar ts https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ To 1.The Assistant Director, Town Panchayat, Vellore Zone, Vellore-9. 2.The Executive Officer, Town Panchayat, Kanamangalam, Tiruvannamalai District. 3.The Junior Engineer, Electricity Board, Kannamangalam, Arni Taluk, Tiruvannamalai District. 1 cc to Government Pleader, Sr.No.30723 Order in W.P.No.10767 of 2011 SP {CO} TP/13.5.2011. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/