D KANNAN Vs. COMMISSIONER OF MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) CHALLENGE in these Writ Appeals are dismissal of Writ Petitions [W.P.Nos.4207 to 4211 and 5645 to 5650/2002] declining to interfere with the enhancement of rent effected by the 2nd Respondent-Theni Allinagaram Municipality. Since all the Writ Appeals arise out of common order of learned single Judge and common questions are involved, all the Writ Appeals are taken up together and disposed of by this Common Judgment.

(2.) APPELLANTS have been the lessees under 2nd Respondent-Theni Allinagaram Municipality in respect of the shops situated at the Municipal Bus Stand, Theni since 1985. They are running Sweet stalls, Bakery Stalls and Petty shops. Initially, period of lease was for three years and the same was extended periodically enhancing the rent by 15% once in three years. By an order dated 09.01.2002, 2nd Respondent has revised the rent at Rs.45/- per sq.ft. for the period from 01.10.2001 to 30.09.2004. Challenging the same, APPELLANTS have filed Writ Petitions in W.P.Nos.4207 to 4211 and 5645 to 5650/2002 on the ground that 2nd Respondent-Municipality has arbitrarily enhanced the rent by 300% to 500% from the original rent as contemplated under G.O.Ms.No.147 Municipal Administration and Water Supply Department dated 30.12.2000. APPELLANTS are not disputing the powers vested with the Respondents in enhancing the rent periodically but opposed the revision made by 2nd Respondent as unilateral, excessive and contrary to the terms and conditions of G.O.Ms.No.147 Municipal Administration and Water Supply Department dated 30.12.2000.

(3.) MR.Dhandapani, learned Special Government Pleader appearing for 1st Respondent submitted that powers vested with 2nd Respondent-Municipality to enhance the rent cannot be challenged. It was further submitted that as per G.O.Ms.No.147 Municipal Administration and Water Supply Department dated 30.12.2000, when the Municipal Council has passed a resolution enhancing the rent on par with other shops, Appellants could have no valid objection. It was further argued that 15% is not a fixed enhancement and as per G.O.Ms.No.147 Municipal Administration and Water Supply Department dated 30.12.2000, it could only be the minimum amount.