Madras High CourtWP(MD)/26191/2025allowed

Ravichandran v. Madurai City Municipal Corporation

2025-09-22Honourable Ms. Justice P.T. Asha4 pages

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 22.09.2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE P.T.ASHA Writ Petition(MD)No.26191 of 2025 and W.M.P(MD)No.20413 of 2025 1.Ravichandran 2.M.Mohamed Muthu 3.B.Ravindran 4.Mumtajbegum 5.Kumar 6.Sethuraj 7.Vellaisamy 8.M.Khadersha ..Petitioners Vs

1. Madurai City Municipal Corporation rep by its Commissioner, Tallakulam, Madurai.

2. The Commissioner, Madurai City Municipal Corporation, rep by its Commissioner, Tallakulam, Madurai.

..Respondents 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 pertaining to the impugned notice issued by the 2nd respondent dated 02.09.2025 in A3/021612/2017 and quash the same. 1/4

For Petitioner : Mr.K.K.Senthil For Respondents : Mr.K.K.Kannan Standing Counsel

ORDER

This writ petition has been filed challenging the impugned notice issued by the 2nd respondent dated 02.09.2025 in A3/021612/2017.

2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, and the learned standing counsel appearing for respondents. Perused the materials available on record.

3. The petitioners are licensees of shops at the Mattuthavani Integrated Bus Stand, belonging to the first respondent Corporation. Through the impugned order, the second respondent directed the petitioners to pay 25% more than the lease amount currently being paid, on the ground that the petitioners had put up additional entrances in their respective shops without permission. Challenging the said order, the petitioners have approached this Court.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the impugned order is a non-speaking order and is, therefore, liable to be set aside. 2/4

5. The learned standing counsel for the respondents submitted that the impugned order is only a notice informing the petitioners with respect to the shop rent.

6. On a perusal of the impugned order, it is seen that the order is nonspeaking. Accordingly, the same is set aside. The writ petition is allowed, and the matter is remitted back to the second respondent. The second respondent is directed to pass a fresh order after issuing notice to the petitioners, receiving and considering their objections, within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed. 22.09.2025 NCC : Yes/No Index : Yes/No Internet:Yes skn To

1. Madurai City Municipal Corporation rep by its Commissioner, Tallakulam, Madurai.

2. The Commissioner, Madurai City Municipal Corporation, rep by its Commissioner, Tallakulam, Madurai.

3/4

P.T.ASHA, J.

skn Writ Petition(MD)No.26191 of 2025 and W.M.P(MD)No.20413 of 2025 22.09.2025 4/4