P.Krishnasamy v. The District Collector
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 15.03.2019
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.R.SWAMINATHAN W.P.(MD)Nos.4335, 4336 and 4337 of 2019 and W.M.P.(MD)Nos.3434, 3436 and 3438 of 2019 W.P(MD)No.4335 of 2019 P.Krishnasamy ... Petitioner Vs 1.The District Collector, Tirunelveli.
2.Sivagiri Town Panchayat, Sivagiri, Tirunelveli District, Through it's Executive Officer ... Respondents PRAYER: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records of the second respondent in Na.Ka.No.31/2019 dated 09.02.2019 and quash the same and direct the respondents to continue to lease the Shop No.19 to the petitioner.
W.P(MD)No.4336 of 2019 S.Subramanian ... Petitioner Vs 1.The District Collector, Tirunelveli.
2.Sivagiri Town Panchayat, Sivagiri, Tirunelveli District, Through it's Executive Officer ... Respondents PRAYER: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records of the second respondent in Na.Ka.No.31/2019 dated 09.02.2019 and quash the same and direct the respondents to continue to lease the Shop Nos.15 and 16 to the petitioner. W.P(MD)No.4337 of 2019 R.Mahalingam ... Petitioner Vs 1.The District Collector, Tirunelveli.
2.Sivagiri Town Panchayat, Sivagiri, Tirunelveli District, Through it's Executive Officer ... Respondents PRAYER: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records of the second respondent in Na.Ka.No.31/2019 dated 09.02.2019 and quash the same and direct the respondents to continue to lease the Shop No.17 to the petitioner.
For Petitioner : Mr.T.S.R.Venkat Ramana For Respondents : Mr.M.Rajarajan Government Advocate (in all writ petitions) COMMON ORDER Heard the learned counsel on either side.
2.The auction notices impugned in these three writ petitions have been withdrawn. Therefore, nothing survives for further consideration in these writ petitions.
3.The learned counsel for the petitioner categorically asserts that the other lessees / licensees under the second respondent Town Panchayat have been favoured with extension of their leases. 4.The learned standing counsel would further state that the other lessees have approached the second respondent seeking extension of their leases and their request is under consideration. 5.This Court directs the second respondent to treat these writ petitioners on par with other similarly placed lessees / licensees. With this direction and observation, these writ petitions are closed.
6.The petitioners are at liberty to approach the second respondent for extension of their leases. Their request will be considered on the same terms as extended to the other lessees / licensees. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.
Sd/- Assistant Registrar (CO) // True Copy // Sub Assistant Registrar
pnn To 1.The District Collector, Tirunelveli.
2.The Executive Officer, Sivagiri Town Panchayat, Sivagiri, Tirunelveli District.
+3 CC to M/s.T.S.R.VENKAT RAMANA, Advocate ( SR-54540[F], 54541,54542) +1 CC to M/s.SPL GP ( SR-54645[F] dated 18/03/2019 ) W.P.(MD)Nos.4335, 4336 and 4337 of 2019 and W.M.P.(MD)Nos.3434, 3436 and 3438 of 2019 15.03.2019 DS/ /SAR- (18.03.2019) 3 P 7 C