Irulappan.V v. The Commissioner

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 23.11.2022

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE Mrs.JUSTICE V.BHAVANI SUBBAROYAN W.P. (MD) No.26410 of 2022 and W.M.P.(MD)Nos.20593 and 20594 of 2022 V.Irulappan .. Petitioner Vs.

The Commissioner, Dindigul Corporation, Dindigul.

.. Respondent Prayer :- Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, to direct the respondent Corporation to grant petitioner's license and to permit the petitioner to start the work of collecting entry fee in Gandhi Ground Daily Market at Dindigul on receiving the balance first year license fee of Rs.15,00,000/- considering the petitioner's representation dated 17.11.2022.

For Petitioner : Mr.G.Prabhu Rajadurai For Respondent : Mr.M.Thirunavukarasu Standing Counsel

ORDER

This Writ Petition has been filed for issuance of Writ of Mandamus, directing respondent herein to grant petitioner's license and to permit the petitioner to start the work of collecting entry fee in Gandhi Ground Daily 1/4

Market at Dindigul on receiving the balance first year license fee of Rs.15,00,000/- by considering the petitioner's representation, dated 17.11.2022.

2.Heard Mr.G.Prabhu Rajadurai, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.M.Thirunavukarasu, learned Standing Counsel, who takes notice for respondent. By consent of both the parties, this writ petition is taken up for final disposal at the admission stage itself. 3.The grievance of the petitioner is that the representation submitted by the petitioner dated 17.11.2022, seeking to grant license by accepting the fee paid by the petitioner, has not been considered by the respondent. 4.The learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondent would submit that the representation of the petitioner dated 17.11.2022 has been considered by the respondent. He has also produced the proceedings of the respondent, dated 22.11.2022. It has been stated in the proceedings that the petitioner has not paid the bid amount within the time stipulated by the respondent Corporation, even after the repeated notice that has been sent to the petitioner. Hence, the license granted to the petitioner is also cancelled. 2/4

5. In view of the above submission made by the learned Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent, no purpose will be served in keeping this writ petition pending. Accordingly, this Writ Petition is closed. It is needless to mention here that the writ petitioner is at liberty to challenge the proceedings of the respondent, if he is so advised, in the manner known to law. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed. 23.11.2022 Index : Yes/No Internet : Yes/No ta To The Commissioner, Dindigul Corporation, Dindigul.

3/4

V.BHAVANI SUBBAROYAN, J.

ta Order made in W.P.(MD) No.26410 of 2022 23.11.2022 4/4