G ANANDAN Vs. COMMISSIONER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) AN auction notice was issued by the first respondent on 27.2.2003 to lease out the right to collect toll fees in front of Na.Pa. Sarathi Maligai under tender Notification dated 14.02.2003. Hence the writ petition was filed for the issuance of a writ of mandamus to forbear the first respondent from granting the right to collect parking charges from the public for parking the vehicles in front of the Na.Pa. Sarathi Maligai at Offices line in Vellore by way of public auction or in any other manner.

(2.) THE petitioner is the owner of a shop in the commercial building consisting of more than 200 shops, which are rented out to several business people who are running their business in the said place. THE notification was attacked on the ground that in front of the building, there is a road which is a national Highway. THErefore, the first respondent has no power to collect taxes from the persons who are coming to the said commercial building for parking their vehicles and the Municipality is also not maintaining the roads. For the past few years, by virtue of leasing out, the lease holders are collecting toll fees from the persons who are coming to the building for parking their vehicles and now they are collecting more than the rate fixed by the Municipality by virtue of it causing hardship to the persons who are coming to the commercial building and also it is reduced considerably.

(3.) NOW at the time of final disposal of the writ petition, we noticed that as per Section 270B of the District Municipality Act, the Municipal Council may construct or provide (and maintain) Public landing places, halting places and cart stands and may levy fees for the use of the same. As per Chapter IX, Sec.162 of the District Municipality Act deals with maintenance and repairs of Streets. Therefore, we are unable to appreciate the contention raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the Municipality has no power to collect the toll tax petitioner from the vehicles parked in front of the commercial complex. Moreover, the petitioner is the shop owner running his business in the shop. If the earlier lease holder was collecting more tax than the one prescribed by the Municipality, he should have filed a complaint to take action against that lease holder. Instead of that, for no reason, he approached this Court and stalled the finalization of the tender to lease out the right to collect the toll fees from the public for parking the vehicles in front of the Na.Pa. Sarathi Maligai at Officers line in Vellore, by virtue of which there is a loss of revenue of the Municipality from 26.03.2003 to this day. Therefore, as the petitioner has misused this public interest litigation and filed this writ petition and got an interim order detriment to the interest of the Municipality causing loss of revenue, we consider it proper dismissing the writ petition with a direction to collect the entire revenue loss caused to the Municipality by virtue of filing this writ petition and obtaining interim injunction by the petitioner for the years 2003-2004, 2004-2005 and 2005-2006 with interest. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is also dismissed.