Disposed

Rengaraj v. The Government of Tamilnadu

Madras HC27 Nov 2023WP(MD)/2750/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court directed the S.Kannanoor Town Panchayat to consider the petitioner's representation regarding lease extension or refund for the pandemic non-operation period, acting upon G.O.(D)No.337 dated 16.06.2023, and convey the decision within four weeks.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the fourth respondent to deal with the representation on merits, consider G.O.(D)No.337 dated 16.06.2023, and convey the decision within four weeks.

Rengaraj Vs The Government of Tamilnadu — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Madras HC (2023)

¶1

W.P.(MD)No.2750 of 2021

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED: 27.11.2023

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.ANAND VENKATESH

¶6

W.P.(MD)No.2750 of 2021 and W.M.P.(MD)No.2256 of 2021

Rengaraj

... Petitioner

Vs.

1.The Government of Tamilnadu,

¶11

Rep.By its Secretary to Government,

¶12

Municipal and Administration of Water

¶13

Supply Department,

¶14

St.George Fort, Chennai-600 009.

¶15

2.The Commissioner of Municipal Administration, No.78, Urban Administrative Building, Santhom High Road, MRC Nagar, Rajaannamalaipuram, Chennai-28.

¶16

3.The District Collector, Office of the Collectorate, Trichy District.

¶17

4.S.Kannanoor Town Panchayat,

¶18

Rep.By its Executive Officer, Samayapuram, Trichy-621 112.

¶19

...Respondents

¶20

PRAYER : Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents to extend the lease period for the non-operation period of 170 days (i.e.from 16.03.2020

¶21

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶22

1/5

¶23

W.P.(MD)No.2750 of 2021

¶24

ti 01.09.2020) or to refund the proportionate license fee for the non-operation period for the collection fee in the Samayapuram weekly market under the 4th respondent in light of the orders passed in W.P.(MD)No.19596/2020 dated 01.02.2021.

¶25

For Petitioner : Mr.S.Ramsundarvijayaraj M/s.Veera Associates For R1 to R3 : Mr.R.Ragavendran Government Advocate For R4 : Mr.J.Lawrance Standing Counsel

¶26

O RDER

¶27

This writ petition has been filed for the issue of writ of mandamus

¶28

directing the respondents, particularly, the fourth respondent, namely S.Kannanoor Town Panchayat to consider the representation made by the petitioner for extension of lease period for the non-operation period during pandemic or to refund the proportionate license fee/caution deposit received from the petitioner.

¶29

2.Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate for the respondents 1 to 3 and the learned standing counsel for the fourth respondent.

¶30

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶31

2/5

¶32

W.P.(MD)No.2750 of 2021

¶33

3.The learned standing counsel appearing on behalf of the fourth respondent, namely the Panchayat, submitted that the representation made by the petitioner has been considered and that orders will be passed and conveyed to the petitioner.

¶34

4.Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case and the limited relief sought for by the petitioner in this writ petition, there shall be a direction to the fourth respondent to deal with the representation made by the petitioner on its own merits and in accordance with law and after taking into consideration the Government Order in G.O.(D)No.337, Municipal Administration and Water Supply (MA.IV) Department, dated 16.06.2023 and convey the decision to the petitioner within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶35

5.This writ petition is disposed of with the above direction. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is also closed.

¶36

27.11.2023 (1/3)

¶37

NCC : Yes / No Index : Yes/No Internet : Yes/No ta

¶38

3/5

¶39

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶40

W.P.(MD)No.2750 of 2021

¶41

¶42

1.The Government of Tamilnadu, Rep.By its Secretary to Government, Municipal and Administration of Water Supply Department,

¶43

St.George Fort, Chennai-600 009.

¶44

2.The Commissioner of Municipal Administration, No.78, Urban Administrative Building, Santhom High Road, MRC Nagar, Rajaannamalaipuram, Chennai-28.

¶45

3.The District Collector, Office of the Collectorate, Trichy District.

¶46

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 4/5

¶47

W.P.(MD)No.2750 of 2021

¶48

N.ANAND VENKATESH, J.

¶49

¶50

W.P.(MD)No.2750 of 2021

¶51

27.11.2023

¶52

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶53

5/5

Rengaraj v. The Government of Tamilnadu

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rengaraj v. The Government of Tamilnadu

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

Sivakumar.K.R Vs the Superintendent Engineer

Manjula Vs the District Collector

Santhana Peer Oli.N Vs the District Registrar

Vasantha Kumari.R (Died) Vs the Branch Manager

E.T.Srinivasan, Vs The Government of Tamilnadu

Rengaraj, Vs The Government of Tamilnadu