Disposed

K.Akbar Basha v. The Commissioner

Madras HC18 Sept 2020WP/12669/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ petition under Article 226, the Madras High Court directed the Assistant Commissioner to investigate the petitioner's representation regarding erroneous rent fixation based on incorrect shop size measurement.

What did the court decide?

Direction to 2nd respondent to call petitioner for enquiry and pass orders within four weeks; petitioner to submit fresh representation with documents.

K.Akbar Basha Vs The Commissioner — Service and Employment | Madras HC (2020)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED 18.09.2020

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N.ANAND VENKATESH

¶5

WP.No.12669/2020 & WMP.No.15649/2020

¶6

K.Akbar Basha .. Petitioner

¶7

Versus

¶8

1.The Commissioner Vellore Corporation Vellore 632 001.

¶9

2.Assistant Commissioner

¶10

Zone-2, Sathuvachari Vellore Corporation Vellore 632 009.

¶11

.. Respondents

¶12

Prayer:Writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to take adequate steps on the representation of the petitioner dated 19.12.2019.

¶13

For Petitioner : Mrs.J.B.Abitha Banu

¶14

For Respondents: Mrs.P.Shanthi Standing counsel

¶15

ORDER

¶16

(1)This writ petition is filed for the issue of a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to consider the representation made by the petitioner on 19.12.2019 wherein the petitioner has sought for a revision of rent on the ground that the rent has been fixed by wrongly construing the total size of the shop allotted to the petitioner.

¶17

(2) The case of the petitioner is that he is running a shop leased to him by the respondents/Corporation. According to the petitioner, the size of the shop that was allotted to the petitioner measures 48 sq.ft. However, at the time when the rent was revised by the respondents/Corporation, the size of the shop was taken as 120 sq.ft. and the rent has been accordingly fixed. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner gave

¶18

Page numbers

¶19

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶20

a representation to the respondents on 19.12.2019 to revise the rent and bring it in proportion to the size of the shop. Since the same was not considered, the present writ petition has been filed before this Court, seeking for appropriate directions.

¶21

(3)Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and Mrs.P.Shanthi, learned Standing counsel accepting notice on behalf of the respondents 1 and 2.

¶22

(4)Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case and the limited relief sought for in this writ petition, there shall be a direction to the 2^nd respondent to consider the representation made by the petitioner on 19.12.2019 by calling the petitioner for an enquiry and appropriate orders shall be passed within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The petitioner is directed to make a fresh representation along with al the relevant documents and a copy of this order.

¶23

(5)This writ petition is disposed of with the above directions. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

¶24

Sd/-

¶25

Assistant Registrar(CS-III)

¶26

//True Copy//

¶27

Sub Assistant Registrar

¶28

¶29

¶30

1.The Commissioner

¶31

Vellore Corporation Vellore 632 001.

¶32

2.Assistant Commissioner Zone-2, Sathuvachari Vellore Corporation Vellore 632 009.

WP.No.12669/2020

CA(CO)

CB(22/10/2020)

Page numbers

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

K.Akbar Basha v. The Commissioner

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

K.Akbar Basha v. The Commissioner

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Opg Power Generation Pvt. Ltd. Vs Tamil Nadu Generation and Distribution

Opg Power Generation Pvt. Ltd. Vs Tamil Nadu Generation and Distribution

M.Thangavelu Vs The secretary to government

Chidambaram Municipality Vs v.Vanchinathan

Mr.Rahul Davis Vs Sree Balaji Medical College and Hospital

Fmr 21,Morappur Fishermen Co. opertive society Vs The Deputy Director of Fisheries