Partly allowed

Gk Abdul Rehman v. the State of Tamil Nadu

Madras HC26 Oct 2021WA/1114/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court quasi permits the appellant, a displaced shop owner in the Metro project, to avail an offer for commercial space allotment at High Court Metro Station or the upcoming Commercial Complex, despite a lapse in executing terms, due to the pandemic lockdown.

What did the court decide?

Directed the second respondent/Competent Authority to process the appellant's application dated 23.11.2019 and allot any one of the shops/kiosk either in High Court Metro Station or in the upcoming Mu

Gk Abdul Rehman Vs the State of Tamil Nadu — Labour and Industrial Disputes | Madras HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED : 26.10.2021

¶3

CORAM :

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.RAJA AND THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY

¶5

WRIT APPEAL NO.1114 OF 2019 & CMP.NO.8032 OF 2019

¶6

GK Abdul Rehman ...Appellant Vs

¶7

The State of Tamil Nadu, rep.by the Secretary to Government, Revenue Department, Secretariat, Chennai-9.

¶8

The Chennai Metro Rail Ltd., Administrative Building, CMRL Depot, Koyambedu, Chennai-107 ...Respondents

¶9

Prayer:

¶10

APPEAL under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent against the order dated 07.12.2018 passed in W.P.No.10509 of 2017.

¶11

Prayer in W.P.No.10509 of 2017:-

¶12

Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a writ of certiorarified mandamus to call for the records of the 2nd respondents policy for “project affected persons background” for the Chennai Metro Rail Project and quash the same that the 2nd respondents policy dated till in so far as not including allotment of commercial space for tenants in lieu of space acquired as arbitrary & unconstitutional and consequently direct the second respondent to allot a suitable commercial space on priority to the petitioner (Matching the highest financial offer accepted by the 2nd respondent for running the business of Mobile Phone and other Allied accessories) in the Chennai Central Metro Railway Station or in the Shopping malls proposed by the CMRL adjacent to the Chennai Central Metro Railway Station as per the National Relocation and Rehabilitation Policy,2007.

¶13

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

¶14

For Appellant : Mr.N.Muralikumaran for M/s.McGan Law Firm For Respondent-1 : Mr.T.Arunkumar, GA For Respondent-2 : Mr.P.Wilson, SC for

¶15

Mr.Jayesh B.Dolia

¶16

Judgment was delivered by T.RAJA,J

¶17

We have heard the learned counsel on either side.

¶18

This writ appeal is directed against the order dated 07.12.2018 passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P.No.10509 of 2017.

¶19

During the pendency of this appeal, a subsequent development has taken place. The second respondent herein resolved to allot the commercial spaces to the interested persons on walk in/first cum first served basis in order to boost the commercial activities in the acquired spaces of the second respondent like metro stations and augment revenue for them. When an option was given to the appellant, he submitted his application bearing Ref.No.CMRL-TPL-19, 7349 for the allotment of kiosk space. The said application was accepted by the Competent Authority and a LOA dated 04.1.2020 was addressed to the appellant to execute the terms and conditions of the allotment within 30 days of the date of receipt of the same. It appears that the appellant failed to get back. Therefore, the said offer appears to have been lapsed.

¶20

But, the reply given by the learned counsel for the appellant indicates that only during serious pandemic situation coupled with the lock down imposed by both the Central and the State Governments, advising citizens not to venture outside so as to maintain social distancing, the appellant did not come forward.

¶21

As a result, the appellant was unable to pursue the offer given by the second respondent.

¶22

Mr.N.Muralikumaran, learned counsel appearing for the appellant, by filing a rejoinder affidavit, has stated that the appellant being a project affected oustee of two shops, he sought for any one of the shops either at the High Court Metro Station or in the upcoming multi-storied commercial complex at the Central Station. The said offer appears to be reasonable to us for the reason that he is one of the project affected oustees. Secondly, the second respondent also, during the pendency of this appeal, has come forward with an offer to allot

¶23

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

¶24

commercial spaces and the appellant also gave an application for allotment of kiosk space in Anna Nagar East UG Metro Station, Corridor II on 23.11.2019 and the said application was also accepted by the second respondent/Competent Authority and thereafter, a Letter of Acceptance (LoA) dated 04.01.2020 was addressed to him to execute the terms and conditions of the allotment within 30 days from the date of receipt of LoA. But, the appellant has failed to respond to the same in view of lockdown imposed by the State Government due to COVID-19.

¶25

However, since the second respondent/Competent Authority has accepted the application of the appellant for allotment of kiosk space, they are directed to process his application dated 23.11.2019 and allot any one of the shops/kiosk either in High Court Metro Station or in the upcoming Multi-storey Commercial Complex.

¶26

Accordingly, the writ appeal is disposed of by directing the second respondent to consider the present offer of the appellant, however, subject to terms and conditions, since the appellant is one of the project affected oustees of two shops in the aforesaid places. No costs. Consequently, the connected CMP is closed.

¶27

Sd/-

¶28

Assistant Registrar(CS VI)

¶29

//True Copy//

¶30

Sub Assistant Registrar

¶31

¶32

¶33

The Secretary to Government of Tamil Nadu, Revenue Department, Secretariat, Chennai-9.

¶34

The Chennai Metro Rail Ltd., Administrative Building, CMRL Depot,

¶35

Koyambedu, Chennai-107

¶36

+1cc to M/s.McGan Law Firm, Advocate, S.R.No.55220

¶37

+1cc to Mr.Jayesh B.Dolia, Advocate, S.R.No.55554

¶38

WA.No.1114 of 2019 & CMP.No.8032 of 2019

¶39

AD(CO) PM/10/11/2021

¶40

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

Gk Abdul Rehman v. the State of Tamil Nadu

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Gk Abdul Rehman v. the State of Tamil Nadu

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

The District Collector Vs T.K.Deivasigamani

P.Ravichandran Vs Mr.a.Karthic, Ias.

The Management of Severn Glocon India Pvt. Ltd. Vs M/S.United Labour Federation

D.Balaraman Vs the Government of Tamilnadu

Chandragiri Construction Vs Mr.S.K.Prabakar, Ias.

R.Kulantaivel Vs the Commissioner