D VENKATESAN Vs. GOVERNMENT OF TAMIL NADU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition has been filed to quash the impugned notice vide Na.Ka.No.3807/2016/A3 dated 29.5.2017 of the fifth respondent.

(2.) The case of the petitioner is that he is the lessees of the shops owned by the fifth respondent Municipality, after entering into a lease agreement with the respondent, based on which, the lease amount was fixed and it was revised once in every three years. According to the petitioner, the fifth respondent has revised the monthly rent by nearly 1000%, which is arbitrary and unreasonable. It is also stated that the fifth respondent has taken a decision to renew the lease and fixed the rent in an arbitrary and capricious manner, and the same is excessive and exorbitant. The fifth respondent ought to have adopted humane and practical approach while fixing the revised rent, and refixing it to nearly 1000% is not reasonable. It is further stated that the guideline value of the properties had been reduced to 33% by the State and that fixing it on higher amount, more particularly, asking the petitioner to pay the rent at nearly 1000%, needs to be interfered with. Hence the petitioner has come forward with this writ petition for the reliefs stated supra.

(3.) The learned counsel appearing for the respondents submitted that the petitioner has been periodically paying the revised rent once in every three years as per G.O.M.S.No.92, Municipal Administration and Water Supply Department, dated 007.2007. According to the respondents, if the petitioner is not willing to pay the revised rent as demanded, it is open to them to go for public auction. Hence referred to Clauses 4(ii) and 4(iii) of the said Government Order and contended that as per the aforesaid Clauses, an opportunity has got to be given to the petitioner/tenement, once the revised rent that is fixed, if the tenements not accept the same, it is open to them to go ahead with public auction.