ABUTHAHIR Vs. SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Writ Petition styled as Public Interest Litigation has been filed to forbear the Commissioner, Madurai Corporation from allotting excess shops beyond the scope of memorandum of understanding dated 17.04.2015, to the third parties and consequently to direct the Commissioner to allot the excess shops to the eligible persons by conducting public auction.

(2.) The petitioner is a wholesaler in fruits and stated to be carrying on business for the past 20 years. The petitioner would state that on account of traffic congestion in Yanaikal and Simmakal, the fourth respondent Corporation took a decision to construct a new fruit market at Mattuthavani. The majority of the traders in fruits were carrying on business in Simmakal and Yanaikal area and unless and until they were relocated to a new premises, the project cannot be successfully implemented and therefore, the Corporation of Madurai entered into a Memorandum of Understanding with the respondent Nos.5 and 6 viz., Simmakkal Palakadaikal Motha Viyabarikal Sangam and Madurai Palacommission Vanigarkal Sangam. In terms of the said Memorandum 240 shops have to be constructed in Mattuthavani at a total cost of Rs.11,84,00,000/- and allotted to the members of the respondent associations and the cost to be met by the associations. The petitioner alleges that the respondent Corporation instead of constructing 240 shops constructed 265 shops and the excess 25 shops were allotted to persons, who were closely associated and known to the elected council and in this regard an allegation is being made against the 7th respondent, who was the Assistant Commissioner of the respondent Corporation. Therefore, the petitioner would state that his representation should be considered and the excess shops, which have been constructed over and above 240 shops have to be allotted to the eligible applicants by public auction only.

(3.) Mr.S.M.A.Jinnah, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner after elaborately setting out the factual position with regard to the terms and conditions of the memorandum of understanding, the list of the beneficiaries to whom the 240 shops are to be allotted and all other related matters and submitted that the officials of the respondent Corporation in collusion with the politicians and others have illegally allotted the 25 shops to persons known to them without following any procedure and without conducting a public auction. The learned counsel also referred to the information furnished under the Right to Information Act by the respondent Corporation to one Mr.K.Hakhim and submitted that it is evidently clear that no public auction was conducted and allotments were made on the whims and fancies of the politicians and the people who were at the helm of affairs in the respondent Corporation at the relevant time. Therefore, this Court should exercise the jurisdiction and set aside all allotments and direct public auction to be conducted.