Judgment :- This Writ Petition has been filed for a writ of mandamus to direct the second respondent to complete the proceedings, in Na.Ka.B2/1456/2002, dated 16. 2002, for cancelling the licence granted to the third respondent for running a Pawn Broker Shop in Shop No.68, Main Bazar, Vellore, Vellore District. 2. The petitioner had stated that he is the owner of the premises, in which the third respondent is having a pawn broker shop, in the name and style of "Vishal Jewellery", as a tenant. The petitioner had filed petitions against the third respondent for evicting him from the premises, on the grounds of wilful default, own use and occupation and due to the reason that the building is in a dilapidated state. Whileso, the second respondent had issued a notice, dated 16. 2002, asking the third respondent to show cause, as to why the license granted to him, to run the pawn broker shop, should not be cancelled. 3. The petitioner had further submitted that inspite of the fact that the third respondent had violated the mandatory conditions imposed on him by the Tamil Nadu Pawn Brokers Act and the Rules framed thereunder, by carrying on the business without getting a fresh license, the license granted to him had not been cancelled. Even though the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents 1, 2 and 4 is not in a position to state the present stage of the matter, it is found that this Court has passed an order, on 6. 2007, which is as follows: "Three weeks time is granted for compliance. In default of compliance, the petition shall stand automatically dismissed." Due to the non-compliance of the condition, the writ petition stands dismissed, in so far as the third respondent is concerned. 4. Further, the petitioner has not shown sufficient cause of reason for this Court to grant the reliefs as prayed for by the petitioner. It is for the authorities concerned, to take necessary action against the third respondent, if he had failed to comply with the mandatory conditions imposed on him by the Tamil Nadu Pawn Brokers Act and the rules framed thereunder. It is for the authorities concerned, to take necessary action against the third respondent, if he had failed to comply with the mandatory conditions imposed on him by the Tamil Nadu Pawn Brokers Act and the rules framed thereunder. The petitioner cannot evict the third respondent, by filing a writ petition, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India inspite of having filed the necessary petitions before the appropriate forum for evicting the third respondent on the grounds of wilful default, own use and occupation and on the ground that the building is in a dilapidated state. 5. In such circumstances, the Writ Petition stands dismissed. No costs.