P V ARUMUGAM Vs. COMMISSIONER DHARAPURAM MUNICIPALITY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner was originally allotted a shop by the respondent Municipality in the year 1989. By the proceedings dated 13.03.2002, the respondent has directed the petitioner to pay the enhanced rent fixed pursuant to the government order in G.O.Ms.No. 147, Municipal Administration and Water Supply Department dated 30.12.2000, proceedings of the Commissioner of municipality Administration, Chennai dated 11.01.2001, and the consequential resolution passed by the respondent in resolution No. 124, dated 08.03.2002. Challenging the said order dated 13.03.2002, THE petitioner has come forward to file the present writ petition.

(2.) IT is seen that the permission given to the petitioner expired in the year 2002. Thereafter, in pursuant to the resolution No. 124, dated 08.03.2002, the respondent extended the lease from 01.04.2002 to 31.03.2005 subject to condition that the petitioner pays the enhanced rent, apart from paying the security deposit. Therefore, from the impugned order, it is very clear that the decision to extend the lease was made only subject to the enhanced rent payable by the petitioner, along with the enhanced security deposit. The said decision was also made after taking into consideration, the government order passed in G.O.Ms.No.147 dated 30.12.2000 and the consequential circular of the Commissioner of Municipality Administration dated 11.01.2001.

(3.) THE petitioner gave an undertaking in the year 2004, which was after filing of the writ petition. THE petitioner also approached the respondent after filing of the writ petition seeking reduction of rent. A perusal of undertaking given would show that the petitioner has undertaken to the effect that in the event of any audit objection, he would be responsible for the same.