Madras High CourtWP(MD)/928/2018disposed of

S.R.Ravikumar, v. The Commissioner,

2025-09-18Honourable Ms. Justice P.T. Asha5 pages

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 18.09.2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE P.T.ASHA Writ Petition(MD)No.928 of 2018 and W.M.P(MD)No.974 of 2018 S.R.Ravikumar ..Petitioner Vs The Commissioner, Tirunelveli Corporation, Tirunelveli, Tirunelveli District.

..Respondent Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Certiorari to call for the records on the files of respondent pertaining to its order bearing Na.Ka.No.A/3554/2015 dated 10.10.2017 and to quash the same.

For Petitioner : Mr.S.C.Herold Singh For Respondent : Mr.A.Kannan 1/5

ORDER

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel for the respondent.

2. This writ petition has been filed challenging the demand notice dated 10.10.2017 issued by the respondent corporation, whereby arrears of rent to the tune of Rs.42,75,627/- have been demanded.

3. It is the case of the petitioner that the property in Door No.22, Central Bus Stand, Tirunelveli, was originally allotted to his father on 01.04.1977 by the respondent Corporation on a monthly rent of Rs.775/-. The petitioner submits that his father had regularly paid the rent without any arrears till his demise. After his father's death, the petitioner continued to run the shop in the said premises and has also been paying rent periodically without any default.

4. The petitioner would further contend that at no point of time there was any outstanding amount payable to the respondent Corporation. In fact, according to him, all payments were duly made and acknowledged by the Corporation. However, to his shock and surprise, the respondent issued the impugned demand notice dated 10.10.2017 claiming a sum of Rs. 2/5

42,75,627/- as arrears of rent. The petitioner asserts that such a huge demand is arbitrary, exorbitant, and wholly unsustainable.

5. It is also the specific case of the petitioner that the demand has been raised without furnishing any details of calculation or basis for such arrears. No prior notice or opportunity was given to him before raising such a demand. Therefore, the petitioner submits that the impugned demand notice is illegal, violative of principles of natural justice, and liable to be set aside.

6. It is the contention of the respondent Corporation that the demand notice dated 10.10.2017 for arrears of rent amounting to Rs.42,75,627/- has been issued strictly in accordance with the relevant records and provisions governing the lease of the property in question.

7. On a perusal of the records, it is seen that the impugned order is in the nature of a demand notice. The petitioner is therefore directed to submit a detailed explanation to the said demand notice, along with all relevant proof of payment of rent. Upon receipt of the explanation and supporting documents, the respondent shall examine the submissions carefully and consider the petitioner's case on its own merits and in accordance with law. The respondent shall also afford the petitioner an opportunity of personal hearing, before passing a final order. Until such exercise is completed, the 3/5

impugned demand notice shall remain in abeyance and shall not be enforced in any manner.

8. This writ petition is disposed of accordingly. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed. 18.09.2025 NCC : Yes/No Index : Yes/No Internet:Yes skn To The Commissioner, Tirunelveli Corporation, Tirunelveli, Tirunelveli District.

4/5

P.T.ASHA, J.

skn Writ Petition(MD)No.928 of 2018 and W.M.P(MD)No.974 of 2018 18.09.2025 5/5