Justin Xavier vs The District Collector, Kanyakumari District at Nagercoil and The Executive Officer Special Grade Town Panchayat, Kanniyakumari, Kanyakumari District

Honourable Mr. Justice K. Chandru

These writ petitions have been filed by the petitioners, seeking for a direction to allot one shop to the petitioners, constructed in S.No.761 coming under the Kanyakumari Town Panchayat, under the control of the second respondent.

When the matter came up on 02.11.2011, the counsel originally appearing for the petitioners stated that he is no longer appearing for the petitioners, as the petitioners were taken away the bundle along with the change of vakalat. Since no new counsel has been nominated, this Court directed the name of the petitioner to be printed in the cause list. Accordingly, the name of the first writ petitioner is printed in the cause-list.

On notice from this Court, the second respondent appears through counsel and on behalf of the first respondent Mr.M.Govindan, learned Special Government Pleader takes notice.

The grievance of the petitioners was that originally they were payment vendor and they were evicted to clear the space for the tourists in Kanyakumari Town. They were under the impression that the shops, which are going to be built in S.No.761 numbering 8, has to be allotted the persons, who have been evicted earlier from the public places. But, however, the petitioners were under the apprehension that the second respondent decided to allot the shops to the Councillors of the Town Panchayat as well as their henchmen. It was only because of the understanding with the Town Panchayat and those councillors, the Panchayat has passed a resolution to build those shops.

It is in that view of the matter, each of the petitioners have sent representations, dated 29.12.2010. It is also brought to the notice of this Court by the second respondent that earlier one such person has filed a writ petition being W.P.(MD)No.14053 of 2010, seeking for a similar relief and this Court, without going into the merits of the case, by an order dated, 07.01.2011, directed the respondents to consider the case of that petitioner, within a time frame and dispose of the representation filed by the petitioner.

However, the learned counsel for the second respondent stated that the Town Panchayat has taken a decision strictly to allot the shops only by calling applications by a public auction and it cannot be done in any other manner. He also stated that even if any direction is given in this application, the Town Panchayat has also taken a decision only to go for a public auction. He strongly denied the allegations made in the paragraph 7 of the affidavit that there was a understanding between the panchayat and the Councillors to allot the shops only to them or to their henchman.

Mr. M.Rajarajan the learned counsel also further pointed out that even assuming that such a possibility was a reality at the relevant time, but, however, subsequent to the tenure of the local body came to an and, fresh election have been held to the Town Panchayats and newly elected office bearers have notified and therefore, there is hardly any remote possibility of such understanding being executed by the executive officer takes place.

In the light of these rival submissions, it has to be seen whether the prayer of the petitioners though innocuously worded can be considered by this Court. u/s 147 of the Tamil Nadu Panchayat Act, the Panchayat can establish Public market by constructing necessary infrastructures. As to how such properties can be let out is covered by the statutory rules framed u/s 242(2)(xix) of the Tamil Nadu Panchyats Act, known as Tamil Nadu Panchayats (Procedures for Conducting Public Auction of Leases and Sales in Panchayats) Rules, 2001. The said rules have been framed by the State Government vide G.O.Ms.No.277, Rural Development (C-4), dated 22.11.2011. Under rule 3, the Panchayat is bound to bring in public auction in a open and transparent manner. The right to enjoyment of the properties of the Panchayat for any commercial purpose.

In the light of the statutory obligations on the part of the Panchayat, the present prayer of the petitioner cannot be countenanced by this Court and hence, all the writ petitions stand dismissed. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are also dismissed.