PALANI TOWN MUSLIM DHARMA PARIPALANA SANGA WAKF, REPRESENTED BY ITS VICE PRESIDENT Vs. PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Writ Appeal has been directed against the order of the learned single Judge passed in W.P.No.11658 of 2018 dated 3.5.2018, in and by which, after taking note of the fact that the appellant had constructed shops 100 in number and running an unauthorized market and collecting rent and toll from the vehicles, the learned Judge was of the view that the first respondent has passed the reasoned order, which was impugned in the writ petition, need not be subjected to judicial review under Article 226 of the Constitution. While holding so, the learned Judge dismissed the writ petition.

(2.) It appears that earlier, the Palani Municipality had run a market in the premises situated T.S.No.50, Ward No.4, Subramanniyapuram Road, Palani, which was belonging to the Palani Town Muslim Dharma Paribabalana Sangam Waqf, by taking the same for lease for a period from 1982 to 2000 and after expiry of the lease, the Municipality earmarked a place and constructed municipal market and the vendors had also shifted their shops in the newly constructed market. Thereafter, the appellant sangam made a representation seeking permission to have a vegetable market in the same place vacated by the Municipality. By resolution No.257 dated 29.8.2002, the Palani Municipal Council, rejected the request of the appellant sangam. Aggrieved by the same, the appellant sangam preferred an appeal under Section 36 of the Tamil Nadu District Municipalities Act before the Government.

(3.) Be that as it may, it appears that the appellant sangam continued the market and leased out the nearly 100 shops and and also collecting tollgate fee for the vehicles entering into market and that the appellant sangam is running the market for the past 17 years without permission. Further, the appellant sangam are not allowing the municipal staff to measure and inspect the premises for the purpose of assessing property tax and imposing licence fee, etc. Considering these facts, the first respondent, by order 19.04.2018 rejected the appeal. The said rejection order was put to challenge before the learned single Judge. After taking various materials placed before him, the learned Judge dismissed the Writ Petition, with the following observation.