Dismissed

M/S.Holidays Farms & Resorts, v. the Secretary to Government

Madras HC14 Aug 2024WP/21304/2010

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petition challenging rejection of claim for financial incentives under a government tourism scheme. The respondents disbursed an amount during pendency. The Court held that since the incentives were disbursed, nothing survived for adjudication and dismissed the petition, leaving the petitioner free to challenge the amount through appropriate legal remedies.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition dismissed. Petitioner left at liberty to workout remedy regarding the amount disbursed.

M/S.Holidays Farms & Resorts, Vs the Secretary to… — Service and Employment | Madras HC (2024)

¶1

W.P.No.21304 of 2010

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED : 14.08.2024

¶4

CORAM :

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M. DHANDAPANI

¶6

W.P.No.21304 of 2010

¶7

and

¶8

M.P.No.1 of 2010

¶9

M/s.Holidays Farms & Resorts, Represented by its Managing Partners S.Kumar, S/o.V.Swaminthan, and located at Main Road, Akkaraivattam, Karaikal – 609 604. ... Petitioner

¶10

Vs.

¶11

1.The Secretary to the Government (Tourism), Department of Industrial Development (Tourism), Government of Puducherry.

¶12

2.The Under Secretary to the Government (Tourism), Department of Industrial Development (Tourism), Government of Puducherry.

¶13

3.The Director, Department of Tourism, Government of Puducherry. ... Respondents

¶14

Prayer : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records relating to the order dated 10.08.2010 vide

¶15

Page No.1 of 6

¶16

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

¶17

W.P.No.21304 of 2010

¶18

Ref.No.908/Tourism/US/2010 of the third respondent, quash the same and direct the 3^rd respondent to settle the petitioner's claim regarding Financial Incentives calculated as per G.O.Ms.No.1 dated 16.02.2004 and G.O.Ms.No.2 of 2006 dated 18.07.2006 and as per the directions of this court in W.P.No.7893 of 2010 dated 27.04.2010.

¶19

For Petitioner : Mr.K.Suresh Babu For Respondents : Mr.V.Vasanthakumar (Puducherry) *****

¶20

ORDER

¶21

This Writ Petition has been filed seeking for a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records relating to the order dated 10.08.2010 vide Ref.No.908/Tourism/US/2010 of the 3^rd respondent, quash the same and direct the 3^rd respondent to settle the petitioner's claim regarding Financial Incentives calculated as per G.O.Ms.No.1 dated 16.02.2004 and G.O.Ms.No.2 of 2006 dated 18.07.2006 and as per the directions of this court in W.P.No.7893 of 2010 dated 27.04.2010.

¶22

The case of the petitioner is that, the petitioner's resort made an

¶23

Page No.2 of 6

¶24

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

¶25

W.P.No.21304 of 2010

¶26

application dated 02.08.2010 before the 3^rd respondent for grant of financial incentives under Government Tourism Scheme as per G.O.Ms.No.1 dated 16.02.2004 and G.O.Ms.No.2 of 2006 dated 18.07.2006, which was rejected by the 3^rd respondent vide impugned order dated 10.08.2010. Challenging the same, the present writ petition is filed before this court.

¶27

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that, the 3^rd respondent has rejected the application of the petitioner vide impugned order dated 10.08.2010 stating that since the petitioner's resort was commissioned on and after 2005, petitioner's resort is eligible to claim incentives only as per G.O.Ms.No.01/2010/Tsm dated 20.01.2010 is wholly unsustainable. Accordingly, he prays for appropriate orders.

¶28

Learned Additional Government Pleader (Puducherry) appearing for the respondents submitted that, during the pendency of this writ petition, the Financial Incentives Committee conducted a meeting on 25.01.2011, in which, they have decided to grant a sum of Rs.30,00,000/-

¶29

to the petitioner's resort and they have also disbursed the said amount to

¶30

Page No.3 of 6

¶31

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

¶32

W.P.No.21304 of 2010

¶33

the petitioner towards financial incentives and to that effect, the petitioner had given acknowledgment receipt dated 28.02.2011. If at all the petitioner is aggrieved by the said amount, the petitioner has to workout his remedy in the manner known to law. Without doing so, filing the present writ petition is per se unsustainable. Accordingly, he prays for dismissal of this writ petition.

¶34

Heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the materials available on record.

¶35

Admittedly, the petitioner has made an application before the 3^rd respondent seeking financial incentives, however, the same was rejected by way of the impugned order, aggrieved by the same, the petitioner filed the present writ petition seeking financial incentive as per G.O.Ms.No.1 dated 16.02.2004 and G.O.Ms.No.2 of 2006 dated 18.07.2006. However, during the pendency of this writ petition, the respondents have disbursed a sum of Rs.30,00,000/- to the petitioner's resort towards financial incentives as per the minutes of the Financial Incentive Committee dated 25.01.2011. It is the claim of the learned

¶36

Page No.4 of 6

¶37

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

¶38

W.P.No.21304 of 2010

¶39

counsel for the petitioner that the said Rs.30,00,000/- is not in consonance with the G.O.s relied upon by the petitioner. However, this court is of the view that, during the pendency of this writ petition, since the financial incentives was disbursed in favour of the petitioner, nothing survives for adjudication in this writ petition.

¶40

Accordingly, this writ petition is dismissed. However, if the petitioner is aggrieved by the amount disbursed by the respondents towards financial incentives, the petitioner is at liberty to workout the remedy in the manner known to law. No costs. Consequently, the connected writ miscellaneous petition is closed.

¶41

14.08.2024

¶42

Index : Yes / No Speaking order / Non-speaking order Neutral Citation Case : Yes / No sp

¶43

¶44

1.The Secretary to the Government (Tourism), Department of Industrial Development (Tourism), Government of Puducherry.

¶45

2.The Under Secretary to the Government (Tourism),

¶46

Page No.5 of 6

¶47

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

¶48

W.P.No.21304 of 2010

¶49

Department of Industrial Development (Tourism), Government of Puducherry.

¶50

M.DHANDAPANI, J.

¶51

¶52

3.The Director, Department of Tourism, Government of Puducherry.

¶53

W.P.No.21304 of 2010

¶54

14.08.2024

¶55

Page No.6 of 6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

M/S.Holidays Farms & Resorts, v. the Secretary to Government

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S.Holidays Farms & Resorts, 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

A.Anbazhagan Vs Union of India

S.Selvakumar, Vs The Executive Engineer

S. Tharageswaran Vs the Commissioner

Sharin Sheela Mary Vs Bharati Axa Life Insurance Company Ltd.

E.Karpagam Vs the Executive Engineer

S.Muthusamy Vs the Sub Collector