P PARAMASIVAM Vs. STATE OF TAMIL NADU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE above Writ Petition has been filed by the petitioner praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus forbearing the respondents 1 and 2 from evicting the petitioner from the shop measuring 15'x 6' (90 square ft.)situate behind cloak room at the central Platform of Central Bus-stand in tirunelveli as long as the petitioner pays the 15% of the enhanced rent once in a block period of 3 years as per the order of the Hon'ble Supreme Court.

(2.) IN the affidavit filed in support of the above Writ petition, the petitioner would submit that pursuant, to the order dated 26. 6. 92 passed by the first respondent, the second respondent has allotted a vacant site measuring to an extent of 48 square feet situate near the cloak room of tirunelveli Bus-stand for rent at the rate of Rs. 10/- per square feet, subject to some conditions; that the allotment was made for a period of three years from 1. 4. 1992 to 31. 3. 1995; that the petitioner has been doing the business of selling tea, coffee, cool drinks and snacks in the said shop; that the petitioner has been paying Rs. 480/- p. m. as rent to the second respondent; that from 1. 4. 1993 to 31. 3. 1994 the petitioner paid enhanced rent of 15% i. e. Rs. 552/- p. m. ; that from 1. 4. 1994 to 26. 12. 1994 the petitioner paid enhanced rent of 15% i. e. Rs. 630/- p. m. ; that from 27. 12. 1994 he was permitted to occupy an additional space of 90 square feet and has been paying Rs. 10/- per square feet; that the petitioner has been paying Rs. 900/- as rent from 27. 12. 1994 regularly and promptly.

(3.) IN consideration of the facts pleaded, having regard to the materials placed on record and upon hearing the learned counsel for both, this Court is able to assess that originally the petitioner was allotted 32 square feet space situate near the cloak room of Tirunelveli Bus-stand for rent at the rate of Rs. 10/- per square feet, subject to some conditions on 1. 2. 1995. Subsequently, an additional space of 16 square feet was allotted to the petitioner on 10. 2. 1995. The allotment was made for a period of three years from 1. 4. 1992 to 31. 3. 1995. As per condition 5 of the sanction order A1/667/95 dated 1. 2. 1995 the site should be vacated and handed over to the Corporation as and when the shop is a hindrance to the public or passengers. Further, according to the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court reported in A. I. R 1989 s. C. 1026 and AIR 1992 S. C. 1018, cited supra, the petitioner is not entitled to resist the right of the respondent Municipality to auction, the shop because, such right springs from the very right of ownership of the property so long as there is no statutory prohibition.