W.P.No.8913 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 24.03.2026 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.DHANDAPANI W.P.No.8913 of 2026 and W.M.P.Nos.9610 and 9612 of 2026 K.M.Basheer Ahamed ... Petitioner Vs. 1. The Director General of Police Post Box No.601, Dr.Radhakrishnan Salai, Mylapore, Chennai – 600 004. 2. The General Manager (Mkg), Tamil Nadu Co-operative Milk Producers’ Federation Limited, 6-A, Pasumpon Muthuramalinganar Salai, Marketing Unit, Nandanam, Chennai – 35. ... Respondents PRAYER : Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue Writ of Certiorari, calling for the records relating to the impugned order in proceedings Ref. No.3274/N4/Mkg/2025, dated 25.02.2025 passed by the 2nd respondent and quash the same as illegal. _________ https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.8913 of 2026 For Petitioner : Mr.R.Subburaj For Respondents : Mr.P. Kumaresan, Additional Advocate General Mr.V.Meghanathan Govt Advocate (Crl.Side) for R1 Mr.S. Arun Kumar for R2 O R D E R The present Writ Petition has been filed challenging the impugned order dated 25.02.2026, wrongly mentioned as 25.02.2025 issued by the 2nd respondent, whereby the concessionaire-ship granted to the petitioner for running the Aavin Parlour was cancelled without issuing any prior notice or affording an opportunity of hearing. The petitioner was further directed to hand over possession of the premises on or before 04.03.2026. 2. It is stated that the petitioner is maintaining his daughter and two grandchildren, one of whom, aged 6 years, is physically challenged, and the other aged 3 years. It is further stated that on 22.05.2025, the petitioner submitted a representation to the 1st respondent seeking permission to run an Aavin Parlour located within the campus of the DGP Office. The 1st respondent, in turn, forwarded the said application to the 2nd respondent on 16.06.2025. Pursuant thereto, the 2nd respondent issued a tender notification. _________ https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.8913 of 2026 The petitioner participated in the tender process along with several others and, out of eight participants, he was declared the successful bidder. Thereafter, an allotment order was issued in his favour. The petitioner further states that he invested a sum of more than Rs.2,00,000/- towards repair works of the said parlour and also paid a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- towards security deposit. In addition, he paid a sum of Rs.50,000/- towards rent to the 2nd respondent and incurred expenses towards electricity charges for obtaining E.B. service connection. While so, the impugned order cancelling the concessionaire-ship was issued by the 2nd respondent on 25.02.2026, which is arbitrary and illegal. Challenging the same, this writ petition has been filed. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the impugned order was issued without any prior notice, thereby violating the principles of natural justice. He further submitted that the petitioner has invested substantial amounts for renovation and prayed for quashing of the impugned order and for appropriate directions. _________ https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.8913 of 2026 4. Per contra, the learned Additional Advocate General appearing for the 1st respondent submitted that, due to security reasons, the licence granted to the petitioner for operating the Aavin Parlour within the DGP Office premises was cancelled. However, he fairly submitted that the 2nd respondent is willing to accommodate the petitioner in an alternative location. Therefore, appropriate directions may be issued to the petitioner to submit a representation seeking allotment at an alternative place. 5. Concurring with the said submission, learned counsel appearing for the 2nd respondent submitted that two vacant shops are readily available, one at Maduravoyal and another at Kannadasan Nagar, Chennai, and both premises have already been renovated. The said shops are readily available for occupation by tomorrow itself. Hence, suitable directions may be issued permitting the petitioner to choose any one of the locations. 6. In response, learned counsel for the petitioner, on instructions, submitted that the petitioner is willing to opt for the shop at Maduravoyal for running the Aavin Parlour. _________ https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.8913 of 2026 7. This Court finds that the impugned order has been passed without affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and is therefore in violation of the principles of natural justice and unsustainable. At the same time, considering the stand taken by the respondents to accommodate the petitioner at an alternative location and taking into account the substantial investment made by the petitioner, this Court is inclined to issue the following directions: i) The petitioner shall submit a representation to the 2nd respondent, forthwith, opting for the shop at Maduravoyal, Chennai, for running the Aavin Parlour. ii) Upon receipt of such representation, the 2nd respondent shall issue an allotment order in favour of the petitioner for the said shop/premises at Maduravoyal within a period of two days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. iii) The petitioner is permitted to remove and take away all equipment, materials, and articles installed at the existing premises, on such allotment. _________ https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.8913 of 2026 8. With the above directions, the Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed. 24.03.2026 vsi2 To 1. The Director General of Police Post Box No.601, Dr.Radhakrishnan Salai, Mylapore, Chennai – 600 004. 2. The General Manager (Mkg), Tamil Nadu Co-operative Milk Producers’ Federation Limited, 6-A, Pasumpon Muthuramalinganar Salai, Marketing Unit, Nandanam, Chennai – 35. _________ https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.8913 of 2026 M.DHANDAPANI, J. vsi2 W.P.No.8913 of 2026 and W.M.P.Nos.9610 and 9612 of 2026 24.03.2026t _________ https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis