IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
J.Sathya Narayana Prasad, J.
C. Anandhi - Petitioner
Versus
The Commissioner of Municipal Administration and ors. - Respondents
W.P.No.4145 of 2021
Decided On : 10-03-2025
ORDER :
J.Sathya Narayana Prasad, J.
The present writ petition has been filed challenging the impugned auction proceedings dated 08.02.2021 of the respondents 2 and 3 and consequential direction to the respondents 2 and 3 to return back the security deposit of Rs.6,17,354/- and allow the petitioner to collect the Daily License Fee for the period from 01.04.2021 to 31.03.2022.
2. It is the case of the petitioner that her husband late N.Chandrasekhar had participated in Tender-cum-Open Auction for the right to collect Daily License Fee for the roadside shops in the limit of Sasnkarapuram panchayat, which was conducted by the 3rd respondent for the period from 2018-19 to 2020-21. Her husband was declared as a successful bidder and paid a sum of Rs.6,15,000/- inclusive of Earnest Money Deposit of Rs.2,00,000/- together with the requisite G.S.T.,Charges of Rs.1,20,300/- for the period 2018-19 with the 3rd respondent herein.
3. It is the further case of the petitioner that the successful bidder has to pay a security deposit ( lease charges) every year in advance and thereafter to collect the Daily Licence Fee. Accordingly, her husband had exercised his right of collection of daily licence fee for the period from 2018-19 to 2019-20. Thereafter, the third respondent has issued a communication dated 02.04.2020 instructing the petitioner's husband to stop forthwith the collection of daily licence fee due to Pandemic and also in the interest of the general public. By the said communication, the 3rd respondent had also mentioned that no damages shall be paid in this regard. Further, it is stated that the petitioner's husband had deposited the lease charges of Rs.6,17,354/- with the 3rd respondent for the period 2020-21 to ( April 2020 - March 2021) on 09.03.2020 and within a short span the said communication came to be issued, which shattered their entire family. Due to the said loss, her husband suffered a heart attack and died on 23.08.2020. But, the third respondent has issued proceedings in Na.Ka.A1/37/2021 dated 08.02.2021, calling for Tender-cum Public Auction for the right to collect daily licence fee and also collection of weekly licence fee etc., for the period from 2021 to 2024. Pursuant to the same, the petitioner sent a representation dated 15.02.2021 to the respondents requesting them to stop the Tender Proceedings for the time being and requested for extension of time for collecting the daily licence fee for the period from April 2021 to March 2022 as the respondent earlier restraining them from collecting the licence fee due to Pandemic. The petitioner's husband deposited a sum of Rs.6,17,354/- towards security deposit for the period from March 2020 to May 2021 and issued a restrained order not to collect the daily licence fee, the 3rd respondent ought to have either atleast returned the security deposit collected from them or called for tender-cum-open Auction for the period from April 2022 to March 2025. Aggrieved by the Proceedings of the 3rd respondent, the petitioner has filed the present writ petition.
4. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has placed reliance on the order passed by the Madurai Bench of this Court in WP(MD)No.19596 of 2021 dated 01.02.2021. The relevant portion of the said order is extracted hereunder :-
"Contract Act , 1872 ( 9 of 1872) Sections 32,51 & 54 – Constitution of India, Article 14 – Government Contract – Pandemic – Lockdown – Force Majeure' – Waiver of Licence fee- Tender for running shops within premises of Bus stand – petitioner paid licence-fee and occupied shop – within a few months, pandemic erupted and complete Lockdown declared by Government – petitioner seeking waiver of Licence -fee for said period – held, Tender, a Contract between parties governed by 1872 Act – Mandate of Sections 51 & 54 that in case of reciprocal promise, performance cannot be claimed till other has performed – In instant case, Local Body as per term of Contract bound to permit petitioner to keep shop o
The court recognized that pandemic restrictions constitute force majeure, relieving the petitioner from paying license fees during lockdown and entitling her to seek the return of the security deposi....
The COVID-19 pandemic constituted a force majeure event, and the lockdown was not attributable to the fault of the allottees. Therefore, the DTIDC, being a public corporation, was directed to adopt a....
Court has not expressed any opinion on merit with regard to grievance raised in the petitions. It is independently open for the authority to take appropriate decision in accordance with law on the ba....
Municipalities must conduct timely public auctions upon the expiry of licenses granted for specified periods.
In case the site is required by the Licensor for its own or public purposes, the Licencee shall have to hand over the vacant possession of the site at once.
In case the site is required by the Licensor for its own or public purposes, the Licencee shall have to hand over the vacant possession of the site at once.
Demand for license fee before business commencement violates natural justice principles and must be based on factual correctness.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.