Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. Madras High Court
  4. /
  5. 2017
  6. /
  7. January

Jegan Arul vs The District Manager Tasmac

Madras High Court|20 June, 2017

JUDGMENT / ORDER

The Writ Petition has been filed for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondent to refund the caution deposit Rs.2,72,800/- paid by the petitioner for the TASMAC Shop No.10084, Tuticorin Distsrict.
2. The petitioner would among other things aver that he had deposited a sum of Rs.2,72,800/- towards caution deposit and a sum of Rs.2,72,800/- towards two months advance amount to the respondent and the tender confirmation order was passed in favour of the petitioner. The petitioner further states that he ran the bar up to the end of 31.03.2014 without any adverse remark and due to his illness, he was not able to run the bar and he had informed the same to the respondent and there was no arrears as on date and the caution deposit of Rs.2,72,800/- is still vested with the respondent. Hence, the petitioner has come forward to file this writ petition seeking to refund the caution deposit of Rs.2,72,800/-.
3. The learned Standing counsel appearing for the respondent would submit that as per the Tender Condition No.22(a), if the licensee himself closed the bar cannot get return the deposit amount and the petitioner has also accepted the same and signed in the form at the time of issuing the license and therefore, they are not in a position to return the amount.
4. But the learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that as the petitioner was suffering from illness, his case may be considered by the respondent. The learned counsel for the petitioner also submit that he has sent a representation with regard to the above issue on 29.01.2015 and the same may be disposed of by the respondent within the time frame.
5. Though the petitioner has sought for a larger relief, he has submitted that it is suffice to direct the respondent to consider his representation dated 29.01.2015. Therefore, the respondent is directed to dispose of the representation of the petitioner, dated 29.01.2015, within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
6. With the above direction, the writ petition stands disposed of. No costs.
To The District Manager TASMAC, TASMAC Limited, Thoothukudi.
.
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.
Title

Jegan Arul vs The District Manager Tasmac

Court

Madras High Court

JudgmentDate
20 June, 2017