S.Vasudevan v. The Commissioner
Case brief
What is this about?
Writ petition filed to quash license granted to third respondent for leasing vacant land near public toilet. Court held municipality empowered to lease vacant land for public purpose under Swachh Bharat scheme and dismissed petition finding no infirmity in impugned order.
What the court decided
A compact analysis
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 24/7/2019
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.MANIKUMAR and THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE SUBRAMONIUM PRASAD
W.P.No.21478 of 2019
a n d
W.M.P.Nos.20685 and 20686 of 2019
S. Vasudevan ..Petitioner
Vs
1. The Commissioner
Erode Municipal Corporation
Erode District.
2. M. Praveen
3. C. Prakash ..Respondents
Prayer: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, issuance of a Writ of certiorarified mandamus to call for the records pertaining to the impugned license granted by the first respondent vide his office proceedings in Na.Ka.No.A1/982/2017 dated 21/12/2018 with regard to the land to an extent of 25 x 12 i.e., 300 sq.ft at Nethaji Road, near Manikoondu, Erode in Ward No.27 in favour of the third respondent and quash the same and consequently restraining the first respondent from disturbing the said land used as public toilet.
For Petitioner : Mr.I.C.Vasudevan
For Respondents : No Appearance
Issues for consideration
3 issues framed by the court
Whether Article 226 writ petition challenging lease of vacant municipal land for commercial use is maintainable when land is under Swachh Bharat scheme.
Whether Commissioner of Erode Municipal Corporation acted without jurisdiction in granting lease of land adjacent to public toilet.
Whether impugned order dated 21/12/2018 suffers from any infirmity warranting interference.
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
S. Vasudevan
- respondent
Erode Municipal Corporation
- respondent
M. Praveen
- respondent
C. Prakash
Coram
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court