Madras High Court
The Nagercoil Municipal ... vs Mohamed Anzil ... 1St on 22 March, 2022
W.A(MD)No.958 of 2021
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED : 22.03.2022
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE PARESH UPADHYAY
and
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE KRISHNAN RAMASAMY
W.A(MD)No.958 of 2021
and
C.M.P.(MD)No.4314 of 2021
The Nagercoil Municipal Corporation,
166, Balamore Road,
Nagercoil - 629001,
Kanyakumari District,
Rep. by its Municipal Commissioner. ... Appellant / 4th Respondent
Vs.
1.Mohamed Anzil ... 1st Respondent / Petitioner
2.The Government of Tamilnadu,
Rep. by its Secretary to Government,
Municipal Administration and Water Supply Department,
St. Fort George, Chennai - 600 009.
3.The Commissioner of Municipal Administration,
No.78, Urban Administrative Building,
Santhome High Road,
MRC Nagar, Raja Annamalaipuram,
Chennai - 600 028.
4.The District Collector,
Kanyakumari @ Nagercoil, Nagercoil,
Kanyakumari District - 629 001. .. Respondents 2 to 4 /
Respondents 1 to 3
1/7
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A(MD)No.958 of 2021
PRAYER: Writ Appeal is filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent against
the order dated 01.02.2021 passed in W.P(MD)No.19616 of 2020 by the
learned Single Judge.
For Appellant : Mr.P.Athimoolapandian
For Respondent No.1 : Mr.N.Dilipkumar
For Respondents 2 to 4 : Mr.K.Balasubramanian,
Special Government Pleader.
JUDGMENT
[Delivered by PARESH UPADHYAY, J.]
Challenge in this appeal is made to the order dated
01.02.2021 recorded on W.P(MD)No.19616 of 2020. This appeal is by the
respondent Municipal Corporation. By the impugned order, learned Single
Judge has granted relief to the writ petitioner of not paying any licence
fee to the Municipal Corporation (for the shop he is occupying), for the
lock-down period (March to September, 2020).
2. Learned advocate for the appellant has submitted that the
relief granted by learned Single Judge of waiving the licence fee for the
entire lock-down period i.e., for the period from 24.03.2020 to
06.09.2020 is inconsistent with the policy of the State and no relief could
have been granted to the petitioner. It is submitted that, when the shop
in question was leased, the tender condition also stipulated that in the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A(MD)No.958 of 2021
event of default of payment of rent / license fee, no concession will be
granted under any of the circumstances including pandemic. Learned
advocate for the appellant - Municipal Corporation has further submitted
that, in view of the Government Order dated 02.09.2020 waiving the
lease / rent for only two months i.e., for April and May, 2020, it is not
open to the Corporation to give any further concession. It is submitted
that this appeal be entertained.
3. Learned Special Government Pleader for the State
Authorities submitted that the action of the Municipal Corporation, on the
basis of the Government Order cannot be said to illegal and therefore no
interference should have been made by the Writ Court. It is further
submitted that, since the proposal by the Commissioner of Municipal
Administration dated 18.06.2020 was for two months, consequential
Government Order was passed and beyond that no Government Order is
passed by the State and therefore the writ petitioner not entitled to any
relief. It is further submitted that it is the policy of the State and
therefore in such policy decisions, discretion under Article 226 of the
Constitution of India should not be exercised.
4. On the other hand, learned advocate for the original writ
petitioner has submitted that the entire affair of the Country was standstill
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A(MD)No.958 of 2021
in view of the total lock-down announced by the Government and the
petitioner could not have gone to attend his livelihood much less to pay to
the Government and therefore the discretion exercised by learned Single
Judge is just and proper and no interference be made by this court.
Attention of the Court is also invited to G.O.(D)No.298, dated 02.09.2020,
which was stated to have been issued on the basis of the recommendation
of the Commissioner of Municipal Administration dated 18.06.2020. It is
submitted that this appeal be dismissed.
5. The point at issue before this Court in this appeal is,
whether the relief granted by learned Single Judge to the writ petitioner of
waiver of license fee for the period of lock-down (from 24.03.2020 to
06.09.2020) can be said to be erroneous in any manner, which may call
for any interference in this intra-court appeal.
6. Having heard learned advocates for the respective parties
and having considered the material on record this Court finds as under:-
6.1 The difficulties faced by the nation (during March to
September, 2020) was like once in century. The extraordinary
circumstances can not be met with by ordinary measures. The State in its
wisdom thought it proper not to permit any citizen even to walk on the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A(MD)No.958 of 2021
road during the said period. No one would go out to earn money, no one
would go out to spent money.
6.2 Considering this, Government passed order on
02.09.2020 accepting the proposal of the Commissioner of Municipal
Administration dated 18.06.2020, which was for waiver of the license fee
for the months of April and May 2020. We do not find any fault in the
proposal of the Commissioner which was made in the month of June,
2020 because that would not have taken into consideration the
eventualities of the months coming thereafter. If the said proposal was
based on the lock-down for the months of April and May, 2020, we do not
see any change of circumstances for remaining period of the lock-down
upto September, 2020. Only because no proposal was made by the
Commissioner of Municipal Administration in that regard or the
Government not passing any consequential order can not be a guiding
factor to meet with such circumstances.
6.3 We find that, these are circumstances in which the
State on its own should have taken care of the citizen. Having failed to do
so, when this Court in exercise of powers under Article 226 of the
Constitution of India has granted that relief, the same can not be said to
be erroneous in any manner. Not only we do not find any error therein,
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A(MD)No.958 of 2021
we confirm the said view. For these reasons, this appeal needs to be
dismissed.
7. For the above reasons, this appeal is dismissed. No costs.
Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is dismissed.
[P.U., J] [K.R., J]
22.03.2022
Index : No
smn/34
To
1.The Secretary,
Municipal Administration and Water Supply Department,
Government of Tamil Nadu,
St. Fort George, Chennai - 600 009.
2.The Commissioner of Municipal Administration,
No.78, Urban Administrative Building,
Santhome High Road,
MRC Nagar, Raja Annamalaipuram,
Chennai - 600 028.
3.The District Collector,
Kanyakumari @ Nagercoil, Nagercoil,
Kanyakumari District - 629 001.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A(MD)No.958 of 2021
PARESH UPADHYAY, J.
and
KRISHNAN RAMASAMY, J.
smn
W.A(MD)No.958 of 2021
22.03.2022
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
