Judgment :- This writ petition has been filed praying for a writ of Mandamus to direct the second respondent not to demolish the shop situated at the A, B, and C blocks, on Kamarajar Road, Thirupur, and at the vacant site on the southern side of the A block and to direct the said respondent not to hand over the shops to the fourth and fifth respondents till the information regarding the actual space required for the widening of Kamarajar Salai is received from the respondents. 2. It has been stated that the petitioner Association is a duly registered association, whose members are the lessees of the second respondent, in respect of the shops situated on Kamarajar Road, Thirupur, Thirupur District. Nearly 20 members of the petitioner Association, who have the lease, upto 31.3.2009, have already applied to the second respondent, on 31.1.2009, for the renewal of the lease, in respect of their shops, as per the Government order, in G.O.Ms.No.92, Municipal Administration and Water Supply Department, dated 3.7.2007. However, no order had been passed on the applications submitted by the members of the petitioner Association for the renewal of the lease. Therefore, the petitioner Association had approached this Court, in W.P.No.5141 of 2009, praying for a writ of Mandamus, to direct the second respondent, to renew the lease in favour of the members of the petitioner Association, in respect of their shops. This Court, by its order, dated 31.3.2009, had directed the second respondent to consider the applications submitted by the members of the petitioner Association for the renewal of the lease, within the specified period. This Court, while passing the said order, had restrained the second respondent from dispossessing the members of the petitioner Association, from their respective shops, till necessary orders were passed on the applications of the members of the petitioner Association, dated 31.1.2009. 3. It has also been stated that the third and the fourth respondents had written letters to the second respondent to acquire the land, wherein the shops in question are located, for the widening of Kamarajar Road. On the basis of the said letters, a resolution, in Resolution No.605, dated 31.7.2008, had been passed by the Thirupur Corporation. According to the said resolution, the space, that would be remaining after the widening of the road, would be given to the existing lessees of the shops on Kamarajar Road. On the basis of the said letters, a resolution, in Resolution No.605, dated 31.7.2008, had been passed by the Thirupur Corporation. According to the said resolution, the space, that would be remaining after the widening of the road, would be given to the existing lessees of the shops on Kamarajar Road. As such, it is evident that only a limited space is necessary for widening of the road. Since, the shops are 30 feet in length, the existing lessees would be ready and willing to give up 10 feet of their space for the widening of the road. The remaining 20 feet could be retained by them for their use. 4. It has been further stated that, as no orders had been passed, pursuant to the directions issued by this Court, by its order, dated 31.3.2009, in W.P.No.5141 of 2009, the members of the petitioner Association had filed a writ petition, in W.P.No.1402 of 2010, praying for a writ of Mandamus to direct the second respondent to renew the lease in favour of the members of the petitioner Association, in respect of the shops on Kamarajar Road, based on the applications, dated 31.1.2009, after affording a reasonable opportunity to the members of the petitioner Association. By an order, dated 9.2.2010, made in W.P.No.1402 of 2010, this Court had granted 10 days time to vacate the shops and to hand over the same to the fourth and fifth respondents. However, the fourth and fifth respondents have not given the details regarding the actual space required for the widening of the road, till date, inspite of the requests made by the members of the petitioner Association. In such circumstances, the petitioner has preferred the present writ petition before this Court, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. 5. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner had submitted that the second respondent is attempting to vacate the members of the petitioner Association from the shops, which have been allotted to them, on lease, by showing the reason that the fourth and the fifth respondents require sufficient space for the widening of Kamarajar Road, Thirupur. The respondents are deliberately refusing to give the actual details of the space required for the widening of the road. The respondents are deliberately refusing to give the actual details of the space required for the widening of the road. The offer made by the members of the petitioner Association, stating that a portion of their shops, to an extent of about 10 feet, could be taken over by the respondents for the widening of the road. However, the remaining 20 feet should continue to remain with them for being used as shops. 6. Per contra, the learned counsels appearing for the respondents had submitted that a number of writ petitions have been moved before this Court by the petitioner Association and its members to stall the widening of Kamarajar Road, coming under the Thirupur Corporation. Inspite of the order passed by this Court, on 9.2.2010, in W.P.No.1402 of 2010, giving 10 days time for vacating the shops, the members of the petitioner Association had continued to occupy the shops causing serious hindrance to the developmental activities of the Thirupur Corporation and the widening of Kamarajar Road, by the Highways Department. 7. It has also been stated that the members of the petitioner Association have no right to claim that their lease should be renewed by the second respondent Corporation. Further, as the entire space, in which the shops are located is required, for the purpose of widening of Kamarajar Road, the requests made by the members of the petitioner Association, for retaining portions of the shops, cannot be entertained, at this stage. Since, the writ petition filed by the petitioner Association, is devoid of merits, it is liable to be dismissed with costs. 8. In view of the submissions made by the learned counsels appearing for the parties concerned and on a perusal of the records available, this Court is of the considered view that the petitioner association has not shown sufficient cause or reason to grant the reliefs, as prayed for, in the present writ petition. 9. The petitioner association has not been in a position to substantiate it claims by showing that its members have certain vested rights in them to demand that the lease should be renewed in their favour, in respect of the shops located on Kamarajar Road, Thirupur. It is not in dispute that this Court, by its order, dated 9.2.2010, made in W.P.No.1402 of 2010, had granted 10 days time to the members of the petitioner Association to vacate the shops in question. It is not in dispute that this Court, by its order, dated 9.2.2010, made in W.P.No.1402 of 2010, had granted 10 days time to the members of the petitioner Association to vacate the shops in question. However, instead of complying with the said order, the members of the petitioner Association have been making several requests for the renewal of the lease in their favour. As it is seen from the records available before this Court that the space, in which the shops in question are located, is required by the respondents for the widening of Kamarajar Road, coming under the Thirupur Corporation, the members of the petitioner Association cannot rely on resolution No.605, dated 31.7.2008, passed by the Thirupur Corporation, to retain the shops. In such circumstances, for the reasons stated above, it is seen that the present writ petition filed by the petitioner association is devoid of merits. Hence, it is dismissed. No costs. Consequently, connected M.P.No.1 of 2010 is closed.