Refund JUSTICE N.MALA W.P.No.6017 of 2025 and W.M.P.Nos.6621 & 6622 of 2025 Theerthan, M/60 years, S/o.Theerthamalai, Kattarasampatti Village & Post, Harur Taluk, Dharmapuri District. …Petitioner -Vs- 1.The Director of Rural and Panchayat Raj, Panagal Maligai, Saidapet, Chennai. 2.The District Collector/Inspector of Panchayat, Dharmapuri District, Dharmapuri. 3.The Special Officer/Block Development Officer
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 20.06.2025
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE N.MALA
W.P.No.6017 of 2025 and W.M.P.Nos.6621 & 6622 of 2025
Theerthan, M/60 years,
S/o.Theerthamalai,
Kattarasampatti Village & Post,
Harur Taluk,
Dharmapuri District. …Petitioner -Vs-
1.The Director of Rural and Panchayat Raj, Panagal Maligai, Saidapet, Chennai.
2.The District Collector/Inspector of Panchayat, Dharmapuri District, Dharmapuri.
3.The Special Officer/Block Development Officer
(Village Panchayat),
Theerthamalai Village Panchayat, Harur Panchayat Union Dharmapuri District.
4.The President,
Theerthamalai Panchayat, Harur Panchayat Union, Dharmapuri District.
5.S.Sivakumar,
So.Sambasivam,
Theerthamalai Village and Post,
Harur Taluk, Dharmapuri District. …Respondents
Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for the issuance of a direction in the nature of Writ of Certiorarified
Mandamus, to call for the records of the 3rd respondent in Na.Ka.No.1/2023/Oo.Se dated 06.02.2025 and the impugned re-auction notification in Na.Ka.No.1/Oo.Se/2023 dated 06.02.2025, quash the same, and consequently forbear the respondents from interfering with the petitioner’s right to collect tolls for the full term from 09.12.2024 to 08.12.2025 for the Theerthamali Theerthagireeswarar Hill Temple Vehicle Parking Toll Collection and pass such further orders.
For Petitioner
:
Mr.V.R.Kamalanathan for Mr.J.Pradeep
For R1 & R2
:
Mr.M.Rajendiran,
Additional Government Pleader
For R3 & R4
:
Mr.G.Ameadius,
Government Advocate
For R5
:
Mr.M.R.Jothimanian
O R D E R
This writ petition is filed for issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified
Mandamus, to call for the records of the 3rd respondent in Na.Ka.No.1/2023/Oo.Se dated 06.02.2025 and the impugned re-auction notification in Na.Ka.No.1/Oo.Se/2023 dated 06.02.2025, quash the same, and consequently forbear the respondents from interfering with the petitioner’s right to collect tolls for the full term from 09.12.2024 to 08.12.2025, for the Theerthamali Theerthagireeswarar Hill Temple Vehicle Parking Toll Collection.
2. The petitioner participated in a public auction conducted on 04.11.2024, by the third respondent for toll collection rights for parking of vehicles at Theethamalai Theerthagireeshwarar Hill Temple. The petitioner was the highest bidder with a bid amount of Rs. 22,77,872/- (inclusive of
GST). The petitioner’s bid was later confirmed through a resolution of the Panchayat Council on 08.11.2024. Following this, the confirmation order was issued on 09.12.2024, and the petitioner commenced toll collection. Whileso, after the term of the then Panchayat President ended, the confirmation order was abruptly cancelled by the third respondent on 06.02.2025, without any prior notice. Thereafter, a fresh re-auction notice was issued the same day, allegedly under political pressure and on the basis of an application of the fifth respondent, who failed in the original auction. The petitioner aggrieved by the re-auction notification, filed the above writ petition.
3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that thecancellation of the confirmation order and the subsequent re-auction notice were issued without following due process, violating the principles of natural justice, particularly the right to be heard. The counsel submits that having fulfilled all payment obligations and commenced toll collection, the petitioner had a legitimate expectation of completing the term. The decision to re-auction, allegedly influenced by political motives and favoritism towards the fifth respondent, lacked legal justification, was arbitrary and malafide.
4. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner further submits that
consequent to the cancellation of the confirmation order, the licence issued to
the petitioner on 09.12.2024, was cancelled by the District Collector / 2nd respondent on 28.01.2025, on the ground that the conditions stipulated in
G.O.Ms.No.277 dated 22.11.2001, were not followed by the President of Teerthamalai Panchayat, 4th respondent herein.
5. Learned counsel appearing for the fifth respondent submits that after the cancellation of the licence issued to the petitioner, the 5th respondent paid a sum of Rs.21,33,440/- including 10% additional amount in terms of clause 2 of the Tender Notification dated 04.11.2024. The counsel, therefore prayed that there were no merits in the writ petition and it was liable to be dismissed.
6. Heard both sides and perused the materials available on record.
7. In the case on hand, the re-auction notice dated 06.02.2025 was issued by the BDO (3rd respondent herein) and in that also Rule No.18 of the Tamil Nadu Panchayat (Procedures for conducting public auction of lease and sale in panchayats) Rules 2001 and thereafter G.O.Ms.No.277 rural development (C4) Department dated 22.11.2001, wherein according to Rule
18, which reads as follows:
18. Circumstance and procedure to conduct re-auction
(1) Reauction of lease may be conducted in the following circumstances:
(a) When the lease was cancelled due to violation of lease condition by the Lessee;
(b) When another person comes forward to bid for higher amount by remitting an amount higher, by one and a half times more than the bid amount:
(c) When the Inspector or any other authority empowered by him cancel the auction on account of proven irregularities committed in the auction held already; and
(d) When the Panchayat itself resolves to conduct reauction on the ground that the bid amount is too low to be considered as a reasonable bid, compared to the last auction or taking into consideration of the prevailing circumstances.
(2) In the event of re-auction, the procedure laid down for conducting auction in these Rules shall be observed all over again, starting from the issue of re auction notice onwards. Before commencing reauction proceedings, a written order canceling the previous auction, shall be issued by the Executive Authority or the Commissioner or the Secretary, as the case may be based on the resolution of the Panchayat or the orders of the Inspector.
(3) The Executive Authority or the Commissioner or the Secretary, as the case may be, shall be competent to cancel and auction in the event of a situation specified in clause (b) in sub-rule (1) and issue orders before seeking permission of the Panchayat for conducting a re-auction.
(4) When re-auction is ordered, the publication of a notice in the District Gazette and the newspapers may be dispensed with if the Executive Authority or the Commissioner or the Secretary, as the case may be, considers that the bid amount at the re-auction may not be at a level warranting such publication and accordingly notice for shorter duration may be given.
8. Without going into the merits of the case, this Court is of considered opinion as non-compliance with Rule 18 of G.O.Ms.No.277 is evident in the present case, the impugned re-auction dated 06.02.2025 is in violation of the aforesaid Government Order and is liable to be quashed. Accordingly, the same is quashed. The third respondent is directed to:
(a) Conduct a fresh auction for the collection of tolls within a period of four (4) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order;
(b) Refund the deposit amount made by the petitioner, in accordance with the applicable rules, within a period of four (4) weeks;
(c) Refund a sum of Rs.21,33,440/- to the fifth respondent within a period of four (4) weeks;
(d) Conduct a fresh auction for the full term from 09.12.2024 to
08.12.2025 for the collection of vehicle parking tolls at Theerthamali Theerthagireeswarar Hill Temple within a period of six (6) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order; (e) Refund the six months’ deposit amount made by the petitioner, in accordance with the rules, within a period of four (4) weeks; and (f) Refund a sum of Rs.21,33,446/- to the fifth respondent within a period of four (4) weeks.
In the result, the writ petition stands disposed of with the above observations and direction. No costs. Consequently, connected
miscellaneous petitions are closed.
20.06.2025
uma
Index : Yes/No
Speaking/Non Speaking order
To
1.The Director of Rural and Panchayat Raj, Panagal Maligai, Saidapet, Chennai.
2.The District Collector/Inspector of Panchayat, Dharmapuri District, Dharmapuri.
3.The Special Officer/Block Development Officer
(Village Panchayat),
Theerthamalai Village Panchayat, Harur Panchayat Union Dharmapuri District.
4.The President,
Theerthamalai Panchayat, Harur Panchayat Union, Dharmapuri District.
5.S.Sivakumar,
So.Sambasivam,
Theerthamalai Village and Post,
Harur Taluk,
Dharmapuri District.
N.MALA, J. uma
W.P.No.6017 of 2025
20.06.2025
