M S RANGARAJAN Vs. PAMMAL MUNICIPALITY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner has come up with this Writ Petition seeking to quash the impugned tender notice bearing Ref.No.874/2017/E1 published in 'Dhinathanthi' newspaper on 13.09.2017 and the e-tender notice republished on the web portal of Tamil Nadu Government e-Procurement System vide Tender Ref.No. 874/2017/E1 and to forbear the 1st respondent from entering upon the land earmarked as 'children playground' in the layout of the State Bank colony in Pammal.

(2.) According to the petitioner, the 7th respondent Co-operative Society, during the year 1972, had purchased lands comprised in Survey Nos.67/8, 67/9, 68/1, 71/1, 71/2 and 71/3, measuring an extent of 5.83 acres situate in Pammal and promoted a layout for the benefit of its members, who were the employees of the State Bank of India. The 7th respondent had also formed a residential layout comprising of 49 house sites and had duly obtained the approval of the 1st respondent and other competent authorities. The said layout was duly approved and the 7th respondent had also set aside internal roads and further earmarked and allocated an extent of about 4 grounds and 1624 sq. ft. of open land situate in Survey No.71/3 in Village No.129, Pammal located in the First Street of the State Bank of India colony as "Children Playground" for the larger benefit of the residents. The said playground has been and continues to be maintained by the State Bank Colony Welfare Association.

(3.) It is further stated by the petitioner that the office bearers of the State Bank Colony Welfare Association came to know that the 1st respondent is proposing to install an Integrated Municipal Solid Waste facility in the precincts of the said playground and hence, they raised their objections to the proposed move. While so, the 1st respondent issued a tender notice, which was published in 'Dhinathanthi' newspaper on 13.09.2017, calling for submission of bids by eligible contractors, for the construction of a Micro Compost Plant in the playground meant for children. The case of the petitioner is that the land comprising the playground is still owned by the 7th respondent and the 1st respondent is neither the owner of the land comprised in Survey No.71/3, which relates to the playground, nor is in possession of the said land as evidenced by Patta No.2608, and that he has no manner of right in law to initiate any action to construct, install and operate a Micro Compost Plant in the Playground, either by itself or through any of its contractors.