JUDGMENT 1. The petitioner prays for issuance of a Writ in the nature to Certiorari to quash the order Na.Ka.No.210/2007A2 dated 30.11.07 imposing a precondition of deposit of 3 years rental of Rs.1,88,960/- (Rupees one lakh eighty eight thousand nine hundred sixty only) in respect of Shop No.1, New bus stand IDMST Scheme Chengam for renewal of Lease with consequential prayer to the respondents to strictly implement the G.O.Ms.No.92 dated 3.7.07 Municipal Administration and Water Supply department by renewing of lease of Shop No.1, New bus stand IDMST Scheme Chengam and the vacant site situated in front of the Shop No.1, New bus stand IDMST Scheme Chengam. 2. It is the pleaded case of the petitioner that Selection Grade Town Panchayat had constructed 12 shops at new bus stand, Chengam to augment the revenue through collection of rent by leasing out these shops. The petitioner deposited a sum of Rs.50,000/-(Rupees fifty lakhs only) for participating in the auction and participated in the auction where he was declared as successful bidder in respect of Shop No.1, New bus Stand, Chengam. 3. The rent for the shop was fixed at Rs.4,550/-(Rupees four thousand five hundred fifty only) per month, and lease was for three years. 4. It is the case of the petitioner that Government issued G.O.Ms.No.92 (Municipal Administration and Water Supply Department) dated 3.7.07 modifying the Government Order issued earlier in G.O.Ms.No.147 M.W (M) Water department dated 30.12.2000 and revised the conditions of lease as under: "I. The immovable property belonging to municipality shall be leased out only by public auction for the first time. II. The Municipality shall lease out the property initially for period of 3 years and the same shall be renewed automatically after completion of 3 years period for a further period of 3 years on payment of 15% of enhancement of rent. The said exercise will be made for the 3rd term and till the lessee enjoys a total lease period of 9 years. III. On completion of 9 years of lease period the rent amount should be reviewed. The person who is on existing lease shall be given preference to occupy/renew the lease of shop for further period of 9 years on payment of enhanced revised rent. In the event the lessee is not interested to continue, the leased property may be brought for an auction. IV. The person who is on existing lease shall be given preference to occupy/renew the lease of shop for further period of 9 years on payment of enhanced revised rent. In the event the lessee is not interested to continue, the leased property may be brought for an auction. IV. The lessee had to pay the following amount for renewal of lease: 1. > 100 sq.ft Rs. 500/- 2. 100-500 sq.ft. Rs.1000/- 3. 500-1000 sq.ft Rs.1500/- 4. > 1000 sq,ft Rs.2000/- V. In the case of illegal occupants who are occupying the shops they were given one time concession by granting the lease in their favour on condition the applicants should deposit 12 month lease rent in advance. Apart from that, the incumbent should pay the amounts referred the G.O apart from the amounts towards name transfer etc., VI..... VII....." 5. It is the case of the petitioner that the Executive Officer of the Town Panchayat issued Notice on 30.11.2007 pointing out that the lease of shops at New Bus Stand, cheongsam was coming to an end on 31.12.2007 which could be extended for another three years i.e., from 1.1.2008 to 31.12.2010 on payment of enhanced rent of Rs.5235/-(Rupees five thousand two hundred thirty five only) i.e., 15% enhanced rent. 6. However, in the notice, it was stated that the enhanced rent for a period of 36 months, amounting to Rs.1,88,460/-(Rupees one lakhs eighty eight thousand four hundred sixty only) along with Rs.500/-towards renewal charges, was to be paid in advance. 7. The petitioner was therefore directed to deposit the amount within seven days from the date of receipt of notice. It was pointed out that on failure to deposit the amount, the shop will be put to auction. 8. In response, the petitioner showed his willingness to continue as lessee on payment of 15% enhanced rent as per G.O.Ms.No.92 dated 3.7.2007 and to abide by the conditions imposed under the G.O. 9. The petitioner also deposited 15% enhanced rent for a period of one year, which was received by the respondent, along with Rs.500/-(Rupees five hundred only) towards renewal charges. 10. The petitioner, on 2.2.2008, informed the respondent that he paid the enhanced rent for Shop No.1 on 31.1.2008 for a period of three months and was ready to pay the remaining amount within a period of one month. 11. 10. The petitioner, on 2.2.2008, informed the respondent that he paid the enhanced rent for Shop No.1 on 31.1.2008 for a period of three months and was ready to pay the remaining amount within a period of one month. 11. The case of the petitioner is that inspite of the fact that he has opted for renewal of the licence, the respondent is taking steps to auction all the 12 shops. The petitioner has challenged the impugned demand as also the action of the respondent in taking steps to auction of the shops, on the ground that the demand/action on the face of it, is arbitrary being contrary to G.O.Ms.No.92 dated 3.7.2007, which does not stipulate any advance payment of enhanced rent as claimed. 12. On consideration, this court finds that there is force in the contention raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner. The reading of the impugned order itself shows, that the respondent is exercising the power by invoking G.O.Ms.No.92 dated 3.7.2007 in enhancing the lease rent by 15%. The reading of G.O.Ms.No.92 dated 3.7.2007 does not show the payment of advance rent claimed by the respondent. It is also not permissible for the respondent to auction the shop, once the petitioner has opted to continue the lease by paying the enhanced rent and has undertaking to comply with other terms and conditions as stipulated vide G.O.Ms.No.92 dated 3.7.2007. 13. The impugned order, on the face of it, is arbitrary, thus hit by Article 14 of Constitution of India and not sustainable in law. 14. Consequently, the writ petition is allowed and the impugned order dated 30.11.07 is set aside and the respondent is directed to renew the lease to the petitioner at the enhanced lease amount in terms of G.O.Ms.No.92 dated 3.7.2007. Consequently, connected Mps are closed. No costs.