Research › Search › Judgment

Madras High Court · body

2014 DIGILAW 512 (MAD)

Magesh Publicity v. District Collector

2014-02-27

M.VENUGOPAL

body2014
JUDGMENT 1. The Petitioner has focussed the instant Writ of Mandamus praying for issuance of an order by this Court in directing the 1st Respondent to consider and pass orders on its renewal applications dated 06.04.2010 and 03.05.2010. 2. According to the Petitioner/Firm, pursuant to the Government Order, it projected an application to the Palavakkam Village Panchayat for the purpose of erecting hoarding in certain areas. The Executive Authority of Palavakkam Panchayat granted Licence under Rule 3 of Tamil Nadu Panchayats (Licencing of Hoarding and Levy and Collection of Advertisement Tax) Rules, 1999. The said period of Licence was only for a period of one year. During the currency of Licence, the State Government notified new Rules viz., Tamil Nadu Panchayats (Licensing of Hoarding and Levy of Collection of Advertisement Tax) Rules, 2009. In terms of New Rules, the Petitioner submitted its renewal application to the 1st Respondent seeking renewal of Licence along with the requirements under Rule 5 of the said Rule, 60 days prior to the expiry of existing Licence. The said applications dated 06.04.2010 and 03.05.2010 were duly submitted before the office of the 1st Respondent, which was duly acknowledged. The said applications were acted upon by the 1st Respondent, called for remarks from Block Development Officer (Village Panchayats), St. Thomas Mount Panchayat Union. Also, the said officer forwarded his remarks during August 2011. However, the 1st Respondent kept its applications without passing any orders one way or other. As such, the Petitioner has approached this Court, by projecting the present Writ Petition. 3. In view of the limited prayer of the Petitioner is for passing of an order by this Court in directing the 1st Respondent to consider and pass orders on its renewal applications dated 06.04.2010 and 03.05.2010 respectively, this Court, based on Equity, Fair Play and Good Conscience, directs the 1st Respondent to pass a reasoned, speaking order on merits, by looking into the representations of the Petitioner dated 06.04.2010 and 03.05.2010 in a fair and objective manner [of course after providing necessary opportunities to the Petitioner and also by adhering to the Principles of Natural Justice], within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this Order. To facilitate the 1st Respondent to pass a reasoned order on the aforesaid representations made by the Petitioner, this Court, in the interest of Justice, directs the Petitioner to submit a fresh copy of renewal applications dated 06.04.2010 and 03.05.2010 within a period of ten days here from. 4. With the aforesaid directions, the Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.