Back
2024 Supreme(Online)(KER) 13273
HIGH COURT OF KERALA
ANIL K. NARENDRAN, G. GIRISH, JJ
P.D DESAI – Appellant
Versus
TRAVANCORE DEVASWOM BOARD – Respondent
WP(C) 34570/2023
The Travancore Devaswom Board, as a trustee, is obligated to ensure income generation from properties and is not bound to conduct auctions after licence expiry.
Headnote:(A) Travancore-Cochin Hindu Religious Institutions Act, 1950 - Sections 3, 4, 15, 15A, 24, 27, 31 - Writ petition for certiorari to quash notices for arrears of licence fee and mandamus for auction of shop rooms - The Board, as a trustee, must ensure proper income generation from properties under its management. (Paras 1, 33)
(B) Licence agreements - After expiry of the term, the Board is not obliged to conduct an auction as per the licence deed, but must fix rent at prevailing market rates. (Paras 33)
Facts of the case:
Petitioners, licensees of shop rooms in Vaikom Devaswom, challenged notices demanding payment of arrears of licence fee and sought auction participation rights. (Paras 1-3)
Findings of Court:
The Board's actions as a trustee cannot be equated to that of a landlord; proper income generation is essential. (Paras 33)
Issues: Whether the Board is required to conduct an auction after licence expiry and the validity of the demand for arrears. (Paras 33)
Ratio Decidendi: The Board must ensure that rents are fixed at market rates and cannot be compelled to conduct auctions post-licence expiry. (Paras 33)
Result: Writ petition dismissed.
JUDGMENT
Anil K. Narendran, J.
The petitioners, who are the licensees in occupation of the shop rooms in the shopping complex of Vaikom Devaswom under the management of the 1st respondent Travancore Devaswom Board, in the land comprised in Survey No.179/12 of Naduvile Village, Vaikom Taluk, have filed this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking a writ of certiorari to quash Exts.P15 to P21 notices dated 20.09.2023 issued by additional 4th respondent Assistant Devaswom Commissioner, Vaikom, whereby the petitioners are required to clear the arrears of licence fee in respect of their shop rooms, together with interest, within 15 days, failing which appropriate proceedings will be initiated against them. The petitioners have also sought for a writ of mandamus commanding the 1st respondent Board to conduct an auction of the shop rooms, as per clause 10 of the licence deed and permit them to participate in the auction and match the higher offer to renew the licence.
2. The documents marked as Exts.P1 to P6 are the licence deeds entered into between petitioners 1, 2, 3, 5, 7 and 8 and the 1st respondent Board. The licence period of one year in the respective licence deeds entered into between the petitioners and the 1st respondent Board has already expired. The Administrative Officer, Vaikom Devaswom issued Exts.7 to P13(a) notices dated 17.06.2021 requiring the petitioners to pay the licence fee fixed at the revised rate, as per order No.DBROC 16375/17/M dated 17.04.2021, based on report No.CE(G)/ EO/Rent/2021/03 dated 27.01.2021 of the Chief Engineer (General), with effect from May, 2021, to deposit security deposit at the revised rate and execute a fresh licence agreement. The document marked as Ext.P14 is a tabular statement prepared by the petitioners showing the difference in the licence fee.
3. When the petitioners defaulted payment of the licence fee, the additional 4th respondent Assistant Devaswom Commissioner issued Exts.P15 to P20 demand notices, requiring the petitioners to pay the defaulted licence fee at the revised rate and execute the licence agreement, within 15 days from the date of receipt of those notices. On receipt of Ext.P15 to P20 notices, the petitioners submitted Ext.P22 reply pointing out clause 10 of the licence agreements, which provides for the conduct of an auction, after the expiry of the term of the licence. Relying on Para.16.3 of Ext.P23 Policy Guidelines for Land Management by Major Ports, 2014 the petitioners would contend that after the expiry of the term of the licence, the 1st respondent Board has to conduct an auction, with an option to the licensee to match the highest amount.
4. On 19.10.2023, when this writ petition came up for consideration, the petitioners were directed to file an application to implead the Commissioner, Travancore Devaswom Board and also the Assistant Devaswom Commissioner, Vaikom as additional respondents. By the order dated 26.10.2023 in I.A. No.1 of 2023, the Devaswom Commissioner and the Assistant Devaswom Commissioner were impleaded as additional respondents 3 and 4. The learned Standing Counsel for the Travancore Devaswom Board sought time to get instructions.
5. On 14.11.2023, when this writ petition came up for consideration, the learned Standing Counsel for Travancore Devaswom Board sought time to file a counter affidavit. On a query made by this Court, the learned Standing Counsel submitted that petitioners 1 to 3, 5, 7, 8 and 9 have defaulted payment of monthly rent from 01.05.2021 onwards. The 4th and 6th petitioners have defaulted payment of monthly rent from 01.11.2019 and 01.03.2020 respectively. By the order dated 14.11.2023, the 1st respondent Board was directed to explain in the counter affidavit, the facts and circumstances in which the petitioners were permitted to occupy the tenanted premises, despite their default in payment of rent for the last several years.
6. The respondents have filed a counter affidavit dated 18.12.202
