The High Court disposed of a writ petition challenging a tender notice. The Court refused to interfere because the petitioner failed to pay the admitted lease dues of Rs.6,41,573/- stipulated in the interim stay order, even citing a financial crisis.
Impugned notice dated 10.03.2020 for fresh tender was allowed to stand due to petitioner's non-compliance.
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 : 17.08.2020
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N. ANAND VENKATESH
W.P No.8118 of 2020 and W.M.P.No.9640 of 2020
S.Thiyagarajan,
S/o.Sundaram,
No.6, Vanniyar Othavadai Street,
Madhuranthagam, Chengalpet. ...Petitioner
vs.
1.The Secretary,
Municipal Administration,
Saint George Fort,
Chennai – 600 009.
2.The Commissioner,
Commissioner of Municipalities,
Madurantakam. ...Respondents
Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the
Constitution of India for issuance of a Writ of Certiorari, to
call for the records relating to the notice dated 10.03.2020 in
Na.Ka.No.39/18/m 1 passed the second respondent, quash the same.
For Petitioner : Mr.J.Sudhakaran
For Respondents : Mr.S.N.Parthasarathi
Government Advocate for R1
: Mr.T.Srinivas for R2
O R D E R
This writ petition has been filed challenging the notice
issued by the second respondent dated 10.03.2020 calling for a
fresh tender, on the ground that the license of the petitioner is
coming to an end only on 08.09.2020.
“Mr.S.N.Parthasarathi, learned Government Advocate appears and takes notice for the first respondent.
2.Mr.T.Srinivas, learned counsel appears and takes notice for the second respondent.
3.Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents.
4.It is brought to the notice of this Court that the petitioner is due to pay a sum of Rs.6,41,573/- towards the lease amount up to 31.03.2020.
5.There shall be an order of interim stay subject to the condition that the petitioner pays the sum of Rs.6,41,573/- to the second respondent within a period of six weeks from today.
6.Post this case under the caption “for reporting compliance” on 17.08.2020”
4.Today when the matter is posted for “reporting compliance”. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is not in a position to pay the admitted amount due to financial crisis.
5.In view of the non-compliance of the order passed by this Court dated 06.07.2020 and the petitioner not having paid the admitted amount, this Court is not inclined to interfere with the notice dated 10.03.2020 issued by the second respondent.
//True Copy//
Sub Assistant Registrar
rst
To
+1cc to the Government Pleader, S.R.No.26996
W.P No.8118 of 2020 and W.M.P.No.9640 of 2020
VG II (C0) KKV/28/08/2020
2 issues framed by the court
Whether to quash the notice calling for a fresh tender despite the license being valid until 08.09.2020.
Whether to grant relief where the petitioner failed to pay the admitted lease amount within the interim period.
S.Thiyagarajan
The Secretary, Municipal Administration, Saint George Fort
The Commissioner, Commissioner of Municipalities, Madurantakam
N. ANAND VENKATESH
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
