B.Subramaniyan, v. The Commissioner Of Municipal
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 10.03.2017 CORAM :
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.SUBRAMANIAN W.P(MD)No.3331 of 2013 and M.P(MD)Nos.1 and 2 of 2013 B.Subramaniyan ... Petitioner Vs 1.The Commissioner of Municipal Administration, Chepuk, Chennai - 600 005 2.The Commissioner, Kumbakonam Municipality, Kumbakonam -612 001, Thanjavur District.
3.The chairman, Kumbakonam Municipal Council, Kumbakonam Municipality, Kumbakonam, Thanjavur Dist.
... Respondents PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents to call for Tender of lease in respect of daily flower and fruit stalls situated in North western part of Aringar Anna Bus-stand of Kumbakonam Municipality as per subject No. 31 placed in the Kumbakonam Municipal Council Meeting on 27.01.2012, which was affirmed by the 2nd Respondent in Na.Ka.No.12816/2011/A7 within the time stipulated by this Court.
For Petitioner : M/R.M.Saravanakumar For Respondent 1 : Mr.S.Kumar Additional Governtment Pleader For Respondent 2 : Mr.P.Srinivas For Respondent 3 : No Appearence
ORDER
This Writ Petition has been filed for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents to call for Tender of lease in respect of daily flower and fruit stalls situated in North western part of Aringar Anna Bus-stand of Kumbakonam Municipality as per subject No. 31 placed in the Kumbakonam Municipal Council Meeting on 27.01.2012, which was affirmed by the 2nd Respondent in Na.Ka.No.12816/2011/A7 within the time stipulated by this Court.
2.Heard the learned counsels on either side and perused the materials placed before this Court.
3.The Petitioner, who is a fruit and flower vendor, in occupation of temporary sheds in the Kumbakonam Bus Stand, has come forward with this Writ Petition, claiming that he was doing flower and fruits vending business in the temporary sheds by paying daily fees to one Rajagopal, who has taken the tender for collection of the daily fees. The Municipal Council has decided to terminate the licence given to Rajagopal to collect the daily fee, since the Petitioner and other vendors were blocking the entry point of the bus stand. Entry and exit of people and buses was jeopardized because of the occupation of these vendors. Therefore the Municipality had evicted the Petitioner from the place occupied by him. The Municipality had called for tenders for leasing out permanent shops inside the bus stand.
It is, at this juncture, the present Writ Petition has been filed praying for a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to call for a tender and of lease in respect of daily flower and fruit stalls situated in North western part of Aringar Anna Bus-stand of Kumbakonam Municipality as per subject No. 31 placed in the Kumbakonam Municipal Council Meeting on 27.01.2012, which was affirmed by the 2nd Respondent in Na.Ka.No.12816/2011/A7 within the time stipulated by this Court.
4.It is not in dispute that one Rajagopal was given licence to collect the daily fee from these vendors and as his tender period came to an end on 31.3.2012, on 5.12.2012, a notice was issued to the Petitioner and other vendors stating that the licence given to one Rajagopal has been terminated and it has been decided to cancel the licence and to shift the shops to some other location and thereafter, an auction has also been conducted. It is also clarified that no monthly lease had been given in the said area. Again on 20.12.2012, the Petitioner has been informed that the Municipal council has decided to shift the shops to some other place, since they are creating in-convenience to the public. It is seen that the Petitioner and others sent Demand Drafts to the Municipality claiming to be the fees and these Demand Drafts have been returned stating that the tender period is over and the Municipality has decided to shift the flower and fruit vending shops to some other place.
5.The learned counsel for the Municipality would submit that the Petitioners have been evicted from the place in their occupation and they do not do any business in the said area. 6.The learned counsel for the Petitioner would also accept the said claim of eviction and contend that they should be given priority or preference while auctioning shops to be constructed by the Municipality for the occupation of Flower and Fruit Vendors. I do not think the said request could be granted. Leasing of shops by
the Municipalities is governed by the related Government orders and it has to be done by way of calling for a general tender or public Auction and I do not think any preference could be given to the Petitioner, who was only in temporary occupation in the said area, outside the bus stand. The Municipality having taken a decision to clear them by providing permanent shops for such vendors, the Petitioner has no vested right to continue in the said place. The fact that Petitioner has been doing business in the said area will not give him any preferential right over the same. I do not find any merit in the Writ Petition and thus the Writ Petition fails. 7.Accordingly, the Writ Petition stands dismissed.
Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petitions are dismissed. No costs.
Sd/- Assistant Registrar(CS-III) /TRUE COPY/ Sub Assistant Registrar To 1.The Commissioner of Municipal Administration, Chepuk, Chennai - 600 005 2.The Commissioner, Kumbakonam Municipality, Kumbakonam -612 001, Thanjavur District.
3.The chairman, Kumbakonam Municipal Council, Kumbakonam Municipality, Kumbakonam, Thanjavur Dist.
+1 cc to M/R.R.SRINIVAS, Advocate, SR.NO:14153 +1 cc to M/R.M.SARAVANAKUMAR, Advocate, SR.NO:13797 VSN SVA/PM/PN/21.03.2017/3P/6C W.P(MD)No.3331 of 2017 and M.P(MD)Nos.1 and 2 of 2013 10.03.2017