JUDGMENT (Prayer: Appeal filed under Clause 15 of Letters Patent, against the order passed in W.P(MD)No.2974 of 2023 dated 06.03.2023.Common Judgment: (R. Subramanian, J.) A Commissioner was appointed by this Court to find out the accessibility of the proposed area on the south of the cycle stand in the temple bye-pass road at Palani. The Commissioner has filed a report stating that the proposed place has got access from the main road and it is situate behind the cycle stand which is behind Amma Unavagam on the southern direction. 2. Mr.L.P.Maurya, learned standing counsel appearing for the Palani Municipality would submit that the appellants are only licencees who have no vested right, however, the Municipality has passed a resolution undertaking to put up temporary shops for the use of the appellants till such time the Gandhi Market is reconstructed. Originally, the Municipality has proposed to allot land on the west of the quarters of the Municipal Health Officer. The appellants, however, refused to accept the said place and wanted an alternative place near Amma Unavagam. 3. The Accountant of the Palani Municipality who is familiar with the topography of the area, is present in Court. He would submit that the place that the appellants want which is situate on the west of the Amma Unavagam, will not be sufficient for 15 shops as it measures only 50 feet abutting the road. Therefore, the Municipality has come forward to offer a place behind the Amma Unavagam where all the 15 appellants can be accommodated. It is the contention of Mr.Srinivasa Raghavan, learned appearing for the appellants in W.A(MD)No.322 to 334 of 2023 that there are some shops which are vacant in the main bus stand itself and the Municipality can consider allotting those shops and they are ready to pay the rent. The Accountant of the Municipality who is present, would submit that those shops are yet to be electrified and thereafter, they have to be auctioned by issuing a tender. He is also of the opinion that being shops situate in the bus stand, they may fetch a much higher rent ranging upto Rs.30,000/- per month. 4. Mr.L.P.Maurya, learned standing counsel appearing for the Palani Municipality would submit that since the Municipality had passed a resolution undertaking to construct temporary shops for the appellants, it would do so in the originally proposed place or in the present location. 4. Mr.L.P.Maurya, learned standing counsel appearing for the Palani Municipality would submit that since the Municipality had passed a resolution undertaking to construct temporary shops for the appellants, it would do so in the originally proposed place or in the present location. It is for the appellants to decide whether to accept the same or not. 5. We must point out that the action of the Municipality in earmarking the place and leaving it to the appellants to put up temporary construction is against the very letter of the Municipality dated 23.03.2023. The said letter which relates to Gandhi Market reads as follows:- 6. The dispute in these appeals was not with reference to construction of shops, but it was only with reference to the site. The Municipality will put up temporary structures as it had done for the other vendors who were evicted from the bus stand, for the appellants also and offer it to the appellants within thirty days from today. Such temporary shops shall be constructed preferably near the quarters of the Municipal Health Officer. If the appellants take it, they can move there and if they do not want to take it, they will not be entitled to any alternative place and they can move to any other place at their choice on their own and they cannot compel the Municipality to allot them any particular place. The Municipality will pay a further fee of Rs.25,000/- to the Advocate Commissioner Mr.T.Pon Ramkumar. If the appellants do not take the shops that are offered by the Municipality, the Municipality will be at liberty to take possession of those shops.