SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2024 Supreme(Online)(MAD) 13959

HIGH COURT OF MADRAS
Hon`ble Mr.Justice B.PUGALENDHI
Krishnan. R – Appellant
Versus
The District Collector – Respondent


ORDER

The petitioners are licensees of the second respondent/Executive Officer of Natham Special Grade Town Panchayat and they were permitted to run shops at Natham Bus Stand Campus. By the impugned notice dated 16.06.2023, the second respondent directed the petitioners to vacate the shops for the purpose of renovation of the Bus Stand. Challenging the same, the present writ petition has been filed.

2. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners are in occupation of the buildings, pursuant to an auction conducted by the second respondent. On 26.01.2022, the period of lease was extended from 01.04.2022 to 30.01.2025 for a period of three years. While so, during the lease period, the second respondent has taken a decision to renovate the Bus Stand and also directed the petitioners to vacate the premises without providing an alternative accommodation. He further submitted that the condition of the building is not dilapidated, however, in order to evict these petitioners, the second respondent has issued the impugned notice as if the building is in a dilapidated condition and the renovation work is likely to be taken up.

3. The learned Additional Advo

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top