M.K. ABDUL KHADHAR JAILANI Vs. KODAIKANAL MUNICIPALITY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Since the issue involved in all these writ petitions are one and the same, all the writ petitions are taken up together and disposed of by a common order.

(2.) According to the petitioners, the petitioners in all the writ petitions are the licensees in the shops owned by the respondent Municipality and they are paying the rent regularly. Now, by the impugned order, the respondent Municipality has enhanced the rent exorbitantly with retrospective effect from 01.04.2016 and directed the petitioners to pay the arrears of rent for renewing their licences. Aggrieved over the same, the petitioners have filed these present writ petitions.

(3.) The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that all the petitioners are regularly paying the rent fixed by the Municipality. Now, all of a sudden, without any notice, whatsoever, the respondent Municipality has revised the rent exorbitantly and also directed the petitioners to pay the revised rents from 01.04.2016. The petitioners are in occupation of petty shops and the rent now fixed by the respondent Municipality is disproportionate to the prevailing market value and also the rental value in that area and they are not in a position to pay the revised rent.