Madras High Court
E.P.John Prathap vs The State Of Tamil Nadu on 27 January, 2021
W.A.(MD)Nos.585 & 604 to 613 of 2018 and W.P.(MD)Nos.20166 & 20192 of 2018
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED : 27.01.2021
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.M.SUNDRESH
AND
THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE S.ANANTHI
W.A.(MD)Nos.585 & 604 to 613 of 2018 and W.P.(MD)Nos.20166 &
20192 of 2018
and
C.M.P.(MD)Nos.3294, 3672 and 3371 and 3372 and 3373 and 3374, 3375
and 3376, 3377 and 3378, 3379 and 3380, 3381 and 3382, 3383 and 3384,
3385 and 3386, 3387 and 3388, 3389 of 2018
and W.M.P.(MD)Nos.17952 and 17947 of 2018
W.A.(MD)No.585 of 2018:-
E.P.John Prathap ... Appellant/Petitioner
Vs.
1.The State of Tamil Nadu,
Rep. by its Secretary,
Department of Municipal Administration and
Water Supply,
Fort St. George,
Chennai – 600 009.
2.The Commissioner of Municipal Administration,
Municipal Administration Department,
Ezhilagam, Chepauk,
Chennai – 600 005.
3.The Commissioner,
Nagercoil Municipality,
Nagercoil, Kanyakumari District. ... Respondents / Respondents
http://www.judis.nic.in
1/7
W.A.(MD)Nos.585 & 604 to 613 of 2018 and W.P.(MD)Nos.20166 & 20192 of 2018
Prayer : Appeal filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent against the order
passed by this Court in W.P.(MD)No1884 of 2018, dated 09.02.2018.
For Appellant : Mr.S.Subbiah
Senior Counsel
for Mr.G.Aravinthan
For R1 and R2 : Mr.K.P.Krishnadoss
Special Government Pleader
For R3 : Mr.P.Athimoolapandian
Standing Counsel
*****
COMMON JUDGMENT
(Judgment of the Court was delivered by M.M.SUNDRESH, J.)
All these cases arise out of one and the same issue and therefore, they
are accordingly disposed of by this common judgment.
2.The appellants are the erstwhile Licensees of the respondent
Municipality. They had the benefit of Government Order, passed in G.O.
(Ms)No.92, Municipal Administration and Drinking Water Supply (N.N.4)
Department, dated 03.07.2007. They have been asked to vacate on the premise
that the building has become dilapidated. Once again, seeking umbrage under
the above said Government Order, the appellants have approached this Court.
The learned Single Judge dismissed the Writ Petitions inter alia holding that the
building is being dilapidated, the request is not feasible for consideration.
http://www.judis.nic.in
W.A.(MD)Nos.585 & 604 to 613 of 2018 and W.P.(MD)Nos.20166 & 20192 of 2018
3.In similar cases in W.P.(MD)Nos.13391 of 2017 etc. batch, an order
has been passed by this Court, against which, the respondent Municipality has
filed appeals in W.A.(MD)Nos.1498 of 2017 etc. batch, and the Division Bench
of this Court, vide judgment dated 08.03.2018, set aside the order of the learned
Single Judge and dismissed the writ petitions. As against the same, S.L.Ps.
have been filed in S.L.P.Nos.6781 - 6790 of 2018. By order dated 15.03.2018,
the respondents though not represented, were directed to give possession of one
shop subject to the terms and conditions fixed by them.
4.The learned Senior Counsel appearing for the appellants submitted
that the appellants are entitled to the benefit of the said order. There is no
indication with respect to the proposed re-construction, though substantially
demolished. Under those circumstances, appropriate order will have to be
passed.
5.The learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondent
Municipality submitted that the Licensees were in possession of 262 shops for
more than three decades. Though their possession in the nature of Licence, it
was extended from time to time. New shops have already been constructed and
out of 262 shops, 105 of them are still vacant. If the appellants want, the
http://www.judis.nic.in
W.A.(MD)Nos.585 & 604 to 613 of 2018 and W.P.(MD)Nos.20166 & 20192 of 2018
respondent Municipality is willing to consider for granting Licence to them
subject to fulfilment of terms and conditions imposed. Insofar as the decision
made to construct a new Complex, which has been shelved as even the Shops
constructed recently, there are vacancies as aforesaid. Therefore, if there is any
further construction, it will be neither public interest nor make sense
economically and hence, the Writ Appeals will have to be dismissed.
6.We do not find any merits in these Writ Appeals. The appellants
have been divested by their possession. The building in question has been
demolished substantially. What they have been given is only Licence.
Therefore, it does not carry any vested right. The Hon'ble Apex Court has
passed the order at the admission stage without hearing the contesting
respondent by exercising the power under Article 142 of the Constitution of
India. Therefore, it does not a binding precedent. Even otherwise, the said
order can only be construed to mean that a Shop can be allotted out of 262
shops.
7.The learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondent
Municipality has fairly stated that the appellants would be considered for the
remaining shops.
http://www.judis.nic.in
W.A.(MD)Nos.585 & 604 to 613 of 2018 and W.P.(MD)Nos.20166 & 20192 of 2018
8.The learned Senior Counsel appearing for the appellants submitted
that a representation will be made in this regard.
9.In such view of the matter, while dismissing the Writ Appeals and
the Writ Petitions, we permit the appellants to give a fresh representation within
a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment,
seeking allotment out of the 105 vacant shops. On receipt of the same, the
respondent Municipality may consider them, particularly, by taking note of the
fact that if the shops are lying vacant, nobody would be benefitted. No costs.
Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petitions are closed.
Index :Yes/No [M.M.S.J.,] [S.A.I.J.,]
Internet :Yes 27.01.2021
smn2
Note: In view of the present lock down owing to
COVID-19 pandemic, a web copy of the order may be
utilized for official purposes, but, ensuring that the copy
of the order that is presented is the correct copy, shall
be the responsibility of the advocate/litigant concerned.
To
1.The Secretary to Government of Tamil Nadu,
Department of Municipal Administration and
Water Supply,
Fort St. George,
Chennai – 600 009.
http://www.judis.nic.in
W.A.(MD)Nos.585 & 604 to 613 of 2018 and W.P.(MD)Nos.20166 & 20192 of 2018
2.The Commissioner of Municipal Administration,
Municipal Administration Department,
Ezhilagam, Chepauk,
Chennai – 600 005.
3.The Commissioner,
Nagercoil Municipality,
Nagercoil, Kanyakumari District.
http://www.judis.nic.in
W.A.(MD)Nos.585 & 604 to 613 of 2018 and W.P.(MD)Nos.20166 & 20192 of 2018
M.M.SUNDRESH, J.
AND
S.ANANTHI, J.
smn2
W.A.(MD)Nos.585 & 604 to 613 of 2018 and W.P.(MD)Nos.20166 &
20192 of 2018
27.01.2021
http://www.judis.nic.in
