The Commissioner vs A.Subramanian
2021 Latest Caselaw 12670 Mad

                                                                     W.A.(MD)Nos.160 to 163 of 2018

                       BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

                                                   DATED: 29.06.2021

                                                        CORAM:

                               THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.S.SIVAGNANAM
                                                          AND
                                     THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE S.ANANTHI


                                            W.A.(MD)Nos.160 to 163 of 2018
                                                           and
                                           C.M.P.(MD)Nos.882 to 888 of 2018


                The Commissioner,
                Tirunelveli Municipal Corporation,
                Tirunelveli District.                                          : Appellant

                                                           Vs.

                A.Subramanian                                                  : Respondent


                COMMON PRAYER: Writ Appeal filed under Clause 15 of the Letters

                Patent, against the order dated 11.11.2014 made in W.P.(MD)No.4066,

                4067, 4068 and 4069 of 2010 respectively, on the file of this Hon'ble

                Court and allow this Writ Appeal.



                                   For Appellant   : Mr.Aayiram K.Selvakumar
                                   For Respondent : Mr.V.Meenakshi Sundaram
                                                    [In all cases]




https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
                1/4
                                                                        W.A.(MD)Nos.160 to 163 of 2018




                                                 COMMON JUDGMENT
                                                 **************************
                                     [Common Judgment of the Court was delivered by
                                                  T.S.SIVAGNANAM, J.]


                                   By consent of both parties, the appeals itself are taken up for
                final disposal.



                                   2.Heard Mr.Aayiram K.Selvakumar, learned Counsel appearing

                for the appellant and Mr.V.Meenakshi Sundaram, learned counsel

                appearing for the respondent.



                                   3.The writ petitions filed by the respondents were allowed by a

                common impugned order dated 11.11.2014.                 The challenge in the writ

                petitions was to the charge memo issued to the respondents containing

                various articles of charges relating to non-assessment of the vacant land

                tax, property tax and building tax and non-calculation of tax and failure to

                initiate criminal prosecution against illegal construction.



                                   4.The learned Writ Court, after taking note of various decisions

                including the decision of the Hon'ble Division Bench in the case of

                M.Siva Vs. The Commissioner Pallavaram Municipality [2007 Writ

                Law Reported 246 (DB)] allowed the writ petitions. Further more, the


https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
                2/4
                                                                       W.A.(MD)Nos.160 to 163 of 2018

                Writ Court also took note of the fact that the allegation of non-

                performance of duties was during the period ranging from 1997 to 2006,

                whereas the charge memos were issued much after, that too on the verge

                of the respondents' retirement.



                                   5.Having gone through the impugned orders, we find that there

                is no ground made out by the appellant Corporation to interfere with the

                same. Accordingly, the Writ Appeals stand dismissed. However, there

                shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous

                petitions are closed.



                                                                [T.S.S., J.]   &     [S.A.I., J.]
                                                                          29.06.2021


                Index              : Yes / No
                Internet : Yes / No
                MR
                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.




https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
                3/4
                                                            W.A.(MD)Nos.160 to 163 of 2018




                                                                 T.S.SIVAGNANAM, J.

AND S.ANANTHI, J.

MR

To The Commissioner, Tirunelveli Municipal Corporation, Tirunelveli District.

COMMON JUDGMENT MADE IN W.A.(MD)Nos.160 to 163 of 2018

29.06.2021

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