A.K.Kumaravel, v. The Commissioner,
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 24-08-2016
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N.KIRUBAKARAN W.P. Nos. 17805, 17811 and 17981 of 2016 & W.M.P. Nos.15489, 15495 and 15663 of 2016 A.K.Kumaravel ..Petitioner in WP 17805/2016 K.Satish Kumar ..Petitioner in WP 17811/2016 T.Senthilkumar ..Petitioner in WP 17981/2016 Vs.
1.The Commissioner, Tirupur Corporation, Tirupur.
2.The Superintendent of Police, Thiruppur District.
(R-2 is impleaded as per order of Court dated 18.8.2016) ..Respondents in all WPs Prayer : Petitions under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issue of Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records relating to the impugned proceedings issued by the first respondent in Na.Ka.No.2068/2015/A2 dated 10.3.2016 and the subsequent proceedings issued by the first respondent in Na.Ka.No.A2/2068/2015 dated 18.4.2016, 18.4.2016 and 19.4.2016 and to quash the same and consequently, directing the first respondent to pass appropriate orders for revision of lease for the shops allotted to the petitioners in Shop Nos.7, 8 and 5 at Bharathiyar Commercial Complex, Tiruppur by following the procedure established by law after providing reasonable opportunity to the petitioners.
For Petitioner in all WPs::Mr.G.Sankaran for Mr.S.Balasubramanian For Respondents in all WPs::Mr.S.Silambannan, Senior Counsel for Mrs.P.Shanthi for R1 Mr.P.V. Selvakumar Addl. Govt. Pleader for R2
C O M M O N O R D E R These petitions have been filed by petitioners seeking Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records relating to the impugned proceedings issued by the first respondent in Na.Ka.No.2068/2015/A2 dated 10.3.2016 and the subsequent proceedings issued by the first respondent in Na.Ka.No.A2/2068/2015 dated 18.4.2016, 18.4.2016 and 19.4.2016 and to quash the same and consequently, directing the first respondent to pass appropriate orders for revision of lease for the shops allotted to the petitioners in Shop Nos.7, 8 and 5 at Bharathiyar Commercial Complex, Tiruppur by following the procedure established by law after providing reasonable opportunity to the petitioners.
2. Earlier this Court gave following 3 options viz.,:- (i) either to accept the enhanced license amount and to continue the license in respect of the respective shops occupied by the petitioners;
(ii) If not, the respondent should go ahead with the auction and if the petitioner is able to pay more than what has been fetched in the auction, the same has to be given to the petitioner;
(iii) If the petitioners are not coming forward to pay the enhanced rent or no bidders took part in the auction, the occupant should be asked to surrender the possession and the lock and key of the respective shops should be hold by the Corporation and it should not be given to anybody without the permission of the Court.
3. As per the order of this Court, auction was conducted and third parties quoted highest amount. Since the petitioners have filed affidavits stating that they are ready to match the highest bid amount fetched in the auction, they should be given the shops. However, it is made clear if the existing licensee or Lessee offers more than 5% than the fetched amount in the auction, then they are entitled to.
4. With the above observations, the writ petitions are disposed of. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.
Sd/- Assistant Registrar(CCC) //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar Svn To 1.The Commissioner, Tirupur Corporation, Tirupur.
2.The Superintendent of Police, Thiruppur District.
W.P. Nos.17805, 17811 & 17981 of 2016 bvr[co] srg 15/09/2016