LAWS(KER)-2019-10-167

P.SIVAPRASAD, Vs. ALAPPUZHA MUNICIPALITY

Decided On October 28, 2019
P.Sivaprasad, Appellant
V/S
ALAPPUZHA MUNICIPALITY Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner is stated to be a Chartered Accountant occupying a shop room in the EMS Stadium Shopping Complex owned by the Alappuzha Municipality and he seeks the benefit of Ext.P4 communication issued by the Government of Kerala to the Secretary of said Municipality.

(2.) According to the petitioner, even though the room was allotted to him in the year 2014, electric connection was granted to him much later and that going by Ext.P4 communication, the Government had directed the Secretary of the Municipality not to collect rent for the period until electric connection was granted to the shop room in question. The petitioner says that he and various other similarly placed tenants have preferred Ext.P6 representation before the Principal Secretary of Local Self Government Department and prays that the first respondent - Municipality be directed to either give them the benefit of remission in rent until the electric connection was given or to grant him credit for the payments already made by him in the past, when such electric connection had not been granted. He says that he has detailed the payments made by him in Ext.P5 and prays that this writ petition be thus allowed.

(3.) Sri.Azad Babu, the learned standing counsel appearing for the Municipality, submits that as is clear from Ext.P4, the Government had directed the Secretary of the Municipality not to collect rent until electric connection had been granted or until the agreement had been executed between the Municipality and the tenants. He says that, as is clear from Ext.P1, the petitioner had entered into an agreement with the Municipality on 01.11.2014 but concedes that he does not have instructions as to when the electric connection was granted. He says that these aspects could have been considered by the Municipality, but that the petitioner has, however, never chosen to approach them until now, and that this is pertinent because any decision or remission can be taken only by the Municipality and by no one else.