Research › Search › Judgment

Madras High Court · body

2016 DIGILAW 178 (MAD)

G. Thangadurai v. Commissioner, Tirunelveli Municipal Corporation, Tirunelveli

2016-01-18

K.RAVICHANDRABAABU

body2016
ORDER : This writ petition is filed challenging the impugned auction notice of the first respondent, dated 30.12.2015, and consequently, renew the petitioner's license as per G.O.Ms.No.92, Municipal Administration and Water Supply Department dated 03.07.07 for a block period of 3 years. 2. Though the writ petition is filed seeking for the above said relief, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner restricted his prayer only in respect of challenge to the auction notice dated 30.12.2015. 3. The only contention raised by the petitioner is that the said impugned auction notice is issued by the first respondent without making any paper publication, thereby denying the rights of the interested parties to take-part in the auction. 4. Today, when the matter is taken up for admission in the morning, the learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondents wanted a short time to get instruction from the respondents, since the auction is scheduled to take place tomorrow. Accordingly, the matter was passed over and taken up in the afternoon. 5. The learned Government Advocate, based on instructions, submitted that the respondents are not going to proceed with the impugned tender notification dated 30.12.2015 and they will issue a fresh tender- cum-auction notification by way of paper publication in respect of all the items referred to in the impugned notification. 6. In view of the above said undertaking given by the respondents through the learned Government Advocate, I find that the petitioner cannot have any grievance. Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of by recording the above said undertaking and directing the respondents to issue a fresh auction notice through paper publication. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.