G.Aaro Selvam vs The Commissioner
2022 Latest Caselaw 15625 Mad

                                                                       W.A(MD)No.987 of 2014

                           BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

                                                 DATED : 21.09.2022

                                                      CORAM:

                                  THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE J. NISHA BANU
                                                        and
                           THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N. ANAND VENKATESH

                                               W.A(MD)No.987 of 2014
                                                       and
                                                M.P.(MD)No.2 of 2014


                     G.Aaro Selvam                               ... Appellant/Petitioner


                                                         Vs.

                     The Commissioner,
                     Bodinayakanoor Municipality,
                     Theni District.                             ...Respondent /Respondent



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

                     praying this Court to set aside the order passed by this Court in

                     W.P(MD)No.8734 of 2014, dated 13.06.2014.


                                     For Appellant    : Mr.G.Thalaimutharasu
                                     For Respondent   : Mr.M.Karuppasamy Pandian


                     1/4
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
                                                                       W.A(MD)No.987 of 2014




                                                     JUDGMENT

J. NISHA BANU, J.

AND N. ANAND VENKATESH, J.

The subject matter of challenge in the present writ appeal

pertains to the order passed by the learned Single Judge dismissing the

W.P(MD) No.8734 of 2014 by an order, dated 13.06.2014, refusing to

interfere with the impugned notice issued by the respondent

Municipality.

2.Heard Mr.G.Thalaimutharasu, learned counsel appearing

for the appellant and Mr.M.Karuppasamy Pandian, learned counsel

appearing for the respondent.

3. We have carefully gone through the reasons assigned by

the learned Single Judge at paragraph No.8 of the order and we do not

find any ground to interfere with the same. That apart, a counter-

affidavit has also been filed by the respondent and it is seen that the

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.A(MD)No.987 of 2014

respondent Municipality has already taken possession in the year 2014

itself and the lodge was demolished and new shops were constructed.

4. The learned Standing Counsel submitted that after the

shops were constructed, it was also let out after calling for tender and this

process has been completed twice till date.

5. In view of the above, nothing survives for consideration

in this Writ Appeal and accordingly, the same is dismissed. No costs.

Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

[J.N.B, J.] & [N.A.V., J.] 21.09.2022 Index:Yes/No Internet:Yes/No rm

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.A(MD)No.987 of 2014

J. NISHA BANU, J.

AND N. ANAND VENKATESH, J.

rm

JUDGMENT MADE IN W.A(MD)No.987 of 2014

21.09.2022

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