S KARUNANIDHI Vs. DISTRICT COLLECTOR DISTRICT COLLECTORATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The writ petition is directed against the publication issued by the 3rd respondent Town Panchayat, dated 21.06.2010, calling for applications for grant of lease for the year 2010-11 regarding the fishing right in respect of the tank called "Senkulam" in S.F.No.138 within the 3rd respondent Town Panchayat's Limits.

(2.) It is not in dispute that the petitioner was the lessee for the year 2009-2010, as it is seen in the lease granted to him by the 3rd respondent Town Panchayat on 05.06.2009. The said lease was for the period upto 31.07.2010. The said order also contains a clause stating that for the subsequent year, if the lessee desires to continue for a further period of three years on the basis of increase of 15% in the lease amount, he can make an application to the 3rd respondent 15 days before the expiry of the original lease period. It is, based on such a clause in the order dated 05.06.2009, the petitioner has applied to the 3rd respondent on 26.05.2010 requesting extension of lease for the next year 2010-2011 agreeing to pay 15% amount more than the last years' lease amount. By ignoring the said request, the 3rd respondent has proceeded to call for public tender vide the impugned notification in respect of the fishing right in Sengulam tank, against which the present writ petition has been filed.

(3.) The main contention of the petitioner, as submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner, is that as per G.O.Ms.No.78, Municipal Administration and Water Supplies Department, dated 25.05.2009, the lease period can be extended in favour of the petitioner for the period 2010-2011 by accepting 15% increase in the last years' lease amount. The said G.O. relates to the grant of licence for collecting charges in respect of shandies, bus- stands, vehicle parking places, pay and use toilets and lodging houses. Further, G.O.No.78, dated 25.05.2009, relating to the grant of such licence, no doubt empowers the licensee to have the licence renewed for the subsequent year on enhancement of licence fees by 15%. It is the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner that such Government Order is of a recent origin and the spirit of the same has to be made applicable to the facts of the present case even in respect of lease.