N. MANIVANNAN Vs. THE COMMISSIONER, KALLAKURICHI MUNICIPALITY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner challenges the impugned public auction -cum -tender notification dated 23.06.2014, published in Tamil Nadu vernacular daily "Dhina Thanthi " dated 25.06.2014 and to quash the same and further directing the respondent to issue a fresh notice of auction -cum -tender by fixing a minimum reserved premium or rent for the shops bearing Nos.1, 2, 3, 4, 23, 24, 25 and 26 constructed on the land bearing S.No.473, situated at Salem Main Road, Kallakurichi.

(2.) THE learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the respondent municipality on an earlier occasion issued a public auction -cum -tender notification dated 30.12.2013 and it was published in the Tamil Nadu vernacular daily "Thinamani" dated 31.12.2013 in respect of the very same shops bearing Nos.1, 2, 3 and 4 with a condition to deposit a sum of Rs.25,00,000/ - and Rs.15,00,000/ - respectively and it was put to challenge by filing W.P.No.1271/2014 and notice of motion was ordered on 21.01.2014 and an order of ad -interim injunction was granted in respect of confirmation of tender alone for a period of four weeks and in order to get over the interim order, the respondent had cancelled the earlier public auction -cum -tender notification and issued the impugned notification dated 23.06.2014, fixing the security deposit of Rs.10,00,000/ - each in respect of shop Nos.1, 2, 3 and 4 and Rs.5,00,000/ - each in respect of shop Nos.23, 24, 25 and 26. It is the further submission of the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner that the petitioner had an intention to participate in the public auction -cum -tender and in view of the fact that the respondent has put an onerous condition of pre/security deposit for participating in the auction itself, he could not participate and imposing of such a condition is per se arbitrary and it has no purpose to the object sought to be achieved and hence, prays for quashment of the impugned notification with a further direction for re -issuance of public auction -cum -tender notification. Attention of this Court was also drawn to G.O.Ms.No.92, Municipal Administration and Water Supply Department dated 03.07.2007 by the learned counsel for the petitioner and it is his submission that as per Clause(5) of the said Government Order, lease amount has been fixed depending upon plinth area and therefore, the respondent ought to have fixed the quantum of security deposit in terms of the said Government Order only.

(3.) THIS Court has carefully considered the rival submissions and also perused the materials available on record.