Allowed

Saravanan P v. The Secretary to Government

Madras HC1 Aug 2023WP(MD)/28639/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner sought a writ of mandamus to direct the municipality to conduct a fresh public auction of commercial shops occupied by tenants for over 25 years. The court disposed of the petition after the respondent stated steps were taken for auction under G.O.Ms.No.92.

What did the court decide?

Directed 6th respondent to conduct fresh public auction of shops under G.O.Ms.No.92 dated 03.07.2007.

Saravanan P Vs The Secretary to Government — Property and Title | Madras HC (2023)

¶1

W.P.(MD)No.28639 of 2022

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED: 01.08.2023

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.S.SUNDAR

¶6

and

¶7

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY

¶8

W.P(MD)No.28639 of 2022 and

¶9

W.M.P.(MD) No.22668 of 2022

P.Saravanan

... Petitioner

Vs.

1.The Secretary to Government,

¶14

Finance Department, Fort St. George,

¶15

Chennai – 600 009.

¶16

2.The Secretary to Government, Municipal Administration, Urban and Water Supply Department,

¶17

Fort St. George,

¶18

Chennai – 600 009.

¶19

3.The Commissioner of Municipal Administration, O/o. the Commissioner of Municipal Administration, No.78, Urban Administrative Building,

¶20

Santhome High Road,

¶21

Chennai – 600 028.

¶22

4.The District Collector, Kanyakumari District,

¶23

at Nagercoil.

¶24

1/6

¶25

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

¶26

W.P.(MD)No.28639 of 2022

¶27

5.The Assistant Director of Town Panchayat, Collector Office Campus, Nagercoil, Kanyakumari District.

¶28

6.The Executive Officer, Kanyakumari Special Grade Town Panchayat, Kanyakumari, Kanyakumari District.

¶29

7.M.H. Nazar

¶30

8.M. Ranjith Kumar

¶31

9.G. Johnson ... Respondents

¶32

(R7 to R9 are impleaded vide Court Order dated 17.07.2023 in WMP(MD) No.14373/2023 in W.P.(MD) No.28639/2023 by SSSRJ & DBCJ)

¶33

Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents Nos.1 to 5 to consider the representation dated 01.12.2022 made by the petitioner herein to conduct public auction of the entire commercial establishment shops of the 6^th respondent Special Grade Town Panchayat, Kanyakumari, Kanyakumari District and pass appropriate orders within stipulated time period as may be fixed by this Hon'ble Court.

¶34

For Petitioner : Mr.S.Utchimakali

¶35

For Respondents 1 to 6 : Mr.P.Thilak Kumar Government Pleader

¶36

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

¶37

2/6

¶38

W.P.(MD)No.28639 of 2022

¶39

For Respondents 7 to 9 : Mr.S.Rajasekar M/s.Lajapathi Roy

¶40

¶41

ORDER

¶42

(Order of the Court was made by S.S.SUNDAR, J. )

¶43

The Writ Petition is filed for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus,

¶44

directing the respondents 1 to 5 to consider the representation dated 01.12.2022, made by the petitioner herein to conduct public auction of the entire commercial establishment shops of the 6^th respondent Special Grade Town Panchayat, Kanyakumari, Kanyakumari District, and pass appropriate orders within a time frame.

¶45

The petitioner's grievance is that the respondents should conduct public auction of the shops belonging to the 6^th respondent afresh as the tenants are occupying the same for more than 25 years without any public auction and that the local body is unable to get the lease amount or rent at the market rate.

¶46

In the status report dated 05.01.2023, filed by the 6^th

¶47

respondent, it is stated that the lease period has ended by the end of

¶48

3/6

¶49

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

¶50

W.P.(MD)No.28639 of 2022

¶51

March, 2023 and that the 6^th respondent has taken steps to conduct fresh auction following G.O.Ms.No.92, Municipal Administration and Water Supply Department, dated 03.07.2007.

¶52

Since the prayer in the Writ Petition has been conceded, the Writ Petition is disposed of recording the statement of 6^th respondent to go for auction in terms of G.O.Ms.No.92, Municipal Administration and Water Supply Department, dated 03.07.2007. No costs. Consequently, connected Writ Miscellaneous Petition is closed.

¶53

[S.S.S.R., J.] [D.B.C., J.] 01.08.2023 NCC : Yes / No Index : Yes / No sj To

¶54

1.The Secretary to Government, Finance Department, Fort St. George, Chennai – 600 009.

¶55

2.The Secretary to Government, Municipal Administration, Urban and Water Supply Department,

¶56

Fort St. George, Chennai – 600 009.

¶57

4/6

¶58

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

¶59

W.P.(MD)No.28639 of 2022

¶60

3.The Commissioner of Municipal Administration, O/o. the Commissioner of Municipal Administration, No.78, Urban Administrative Building, Santhome High Road, Chennai – 600 028.

¶61

4.The District Collector, Kanyakumari District, at Nagercoil.

¶62

5.The Assistant Director of Town Panchayat, Collector Office Campus, Nagercoil, Kanyakumari District.

¶63

6.The Executive Officer, Kanyakumari Special Grade Town Panchayat, Kanyakumari, Kanyakumari District.

¶64

5/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶65

W.P.(MD)No.28639 of 2022

¶66

S.S.SUNDAR, J.

¶67

and

¶68

D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY, J.

¶69

¶70

W.P(MD)No.28639 of 2022

¶71

01.08.2023

¶72

6/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Saravanan P v. The Secretary to Government

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Saravanan P v. The Secretary to Government

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

W. Johnson Christopher, Vs Sakthivel

R.Sujin Vs the Superintendent of Police

P.Praba Vs M/s.Union Bank of India

Samuel Raj I Vs The Directorate of Town Panchayats

Karthigaisamy Vs the State of Tamil Nadu

S.P.Mayan Vs M.Vijaya