Allowed

Rajesh Agarwal v. The Commissioner

Madras HC16 Mar 2022WP/5756/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The single judge set aside a notice directing the petitioner to pay rent arrears issued without fixing fair rent under the Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Act. The court directed the authorities to fix the fair rent and issue a proper notice thereafter before disposing the petition with no costs. Subject matter involves rent disputes and writ jurisdiction.

What did the court decide?

The impugned notice is set aside; respondents directed to fix fair rent and issue a proper demand notice thereafter.

Rajesh Agarwal Vs The Commissioner — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Madras HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED : 16.03.2022

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V. BHARATHIDASAN

W.P.NO.5756 OF 2022

Rajesh Agarwal

...Petitioner

1.The Commissioner,

Tamil Nadu Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Department,

¶11

Door No.119,

¶12

Uthamar Gandhi Salai, Nungambakkam, Chennai 34.

¶13

2.The Executive Officer, Arulmighu Katchaleeswarar Thirukovil, No.77, Armenien Street, Chennai ...Respondents

¶14

Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records of the 2^nd respondent notice dated 04.02.2022 and quash the same and consequently, direct the first respondent to consider the appeal dated 14.02.2022 preferred by the petitioner against the notice dated 01.10.2019 on the file of the 2nd respondent.

¶15

For petitioner : Mr.G.K.R.Pandian For respondents : Mr.N.R.R.Arun Natarajan Spl. G.P. ( HR & CE) ORDER

¶16

This writ petition has been filed challenging the notice issued by the 2nd respondent / Executive Officer, directing the petitioner to pay the arrears of rent to the tune of Rs.13,38,983/-.

¶17

The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that without fixing the fair rent as contemplated under Section 34-A of HR & CE Act, the 2nd respondent,

¶18

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

¶19

arbitrarily, issued a demand notice directing the petitioner to pay the said sum.

¶20

The learned Special Government Pleader, appearing for the

¶21

respondent HR & CE submitted that fair rent has been fixed by a committee, but the same is yet to be finalised and no demand has been issued to the petitioner. The learned Special Government Pleader has also produced the original records showing that one of the committee member yet to sign in the fair rent order.

¶22

Considering the above circumstances, without fixing the

¶23

fair rent, the 2nd respondent cannot issued the impugned notice asking him to pay the amount and hence, the impugned notice is liable to be set aside.

¶24

Accordingly, the impugned notice issued by the 2nd respondent is set aside. However, the respondents are directed to fix the fair rent in accordance with law, thereafter, issue proper demand notice to the petitioner.

¶25

With the above directions, this writ petition is disposed of. No costs.

¶26

Sd/-

¶27

Assistant Registrar(CS-VII)

¶28

// True Copy //

¶29

Sub Assistant Registrar

mrp

1.The Commissioner,

Tamil Nadu Hindu Religious Charitable &

¶34

Endowment Department, Door No.119, Uthamar Gandhi Salai, Nungambakkam, Chennai 34.

¶35

2.The Executive Officer, Arulmighu Katchaleeswarar Thirukovil, No.77, Armenien Street, Chennai 600 001.

¶36

+1cc to Mr.G.K.R.Pandian, Advocate, Sr.No.17573 +1cc to the Government Pleader, Sr.No.18290

W.P. No.5756 of 2022

PM(CO)

RVM(11/04/2022)

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

Rajesh Agarwal v. The Commissioner

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rajesh Agarwal 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

M/s.Vijayalakshmi Chit Funds Vs The State of Tamil Nadu

M.R.K.Ravi, Vs The Superintending Engineer

Tmt.P.Aththayee Vs The Chairman cum Managing

P.Sivaraju Vs Tamilnadu Generation and

Jw Rajesh Vs The Assistant Engineer

R.Sai raj Vs The Commissioner