IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 26TH DAY OF AUGUST 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE WRIT PETITION NOs.25864-25866 OF 2018 (GM-TEN) BETWEEN:
1. SRI.C.S.ADI RAMESH, S/O.SRI.SURENDRANATH, AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS, SRIRAMA MEDICALS, SHOP NO.1, DOOM LIGHT CIRCLE, MADHUGIRI, MADHUGIRI TALUK, TUMAKURU DISTRICT-572 132.
2. SRI.CHOTHA RAM.K, S/O.KENARAMJI, AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS, SHOP NO.2, DOOM LIGHT CIRCLE, MADHUGIRI, MADHUGIRI TALUK, TUMAKURU DISTRICT-572 132.
3. SRI.LAKHARAM, S/O.SRI.HEMARAM, AGED ABOUT 4O YEARS, SHOP NO.3, DOOM LIGHT CIRCLE, MADHUGIRI, MADHUGIRI TALUK, TUMAKURU DISTRICT-572 132. ... PETITIONERS (BY SRI.SHIVANANDA.S, ADVOCATE) AND:
1. STATE OF KARNATAKA, BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, URBAN DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, VIKASA SOUDHA, BENGALURU-560 001.
2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, TUMAKURU DISTRICT, TUMAKURU-572 101.
3. THE CHIEF OFFICER, MADHUGIRI TOWN MUNICIPAL COUNCIL, TOWN HALL, MADHUGIRI TALUK, TUMAKURU DISTRICT-572 132. ... RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.SHYAM KOUNDINYA.A.S, ADVOCATE FOR R3; SRI.VIJAY KUMAR.A.PATIL, AGA FOR R1 & R2) THESE WPs ARE FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTIOIN OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED COMMERCIAL SHOPS TENDERS - CUM - AUCTION DATED 29.5.2018 PUBLISHED IN PRAJA PRAGATHI NEWSPAPER, TUMKUR AT ANNEX-K.
THESE PETITIONs COMING ON FOR FINAL DISPOSAL THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:-
ORDER Sri.Shivananda S, learned counsel for the petitioners.
Sri.Shyam Koundinya A.S., learned counsel for respondent No.3.
Sri.Vijaya Kumar A. Patil, Additional Government Advocate for the respondent Nos.1 and 2.
These petitions are admitted for hearing. With the consent of the parties, the matters are taken up for final disposal.
2. The petitioners in these petitions interalia seek a writ of certiorari for quashment of the tender / auction notice dated 29.05.2018 in Praja Pragathi newspaper, Tumkuru. The petitioners also seek a direction to respondent No.3 to consider their representation dated 08.06.2018 submitted by the petitioners as contained in Annexures-L, M and N respectively and not evict the petitioners without due process of law.
3. The facts giving raise to filing of these petitions briefly stated are that the shop in occupation of the petitioners was leased out to the petitioners for a period of 20 years on 19.01.2005.
The period of lease was supposed to come to an end on 18.01.2025. Respondent No.3 issued a show cause notice dated 22.08.2016, by which the petitioners were informed that the lease deed executed in their favour is in controversy of Section 72 of the Karnataka Municipal Corporation Act, 1964 and the decision has been taken to issue a tender notification dated 29.05.2018 which was published on 02.06.2018. In the aforesaid factual background, the petitioners have approached this Court.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that without cancellation of the lease deeds issued in favour of the petitioners, respondent No.3 could not have issued the tender notification for auction of the lease hold rights in respect of the shops in which the petitioners are lessees.
5. On the other hand, respondent No.2 submitted that the lease deeds executed in favour of the petitioners have no sanctity in the eye of law as the same has been executed in fragrant violation under Section 72 of the Act, inasmuch as, lease in favour of the property belonging to the Municipal Council can be executed up to a period of five years and beyond the period of five years, the same can be leased out with the sanction of the State Government. It is also pointed out that the instant sanction of the State Government has not been obtained. Therefore, the petitioners have no right to continue in the premises.
6. Be that as it may. The fact remains that till today, lease issued in favour of the petitioners have not been cancelled by the respondent. The petitioners continue to be the lessees of the respondent. By virtue of ad-interim order granted by this Court, respondent No.3 has not been able to give effect to the tender notification dated 29.05.2018. The same has lost its efficacy by efflux of time. Accordingly, tender notification dated 29.05.2018 is hereby quashed. Respondent No.3 is granted the liberty to issue notice to the petitioners and thereafter to take action against the petitioners, have termination of the lease, if so advised, in accordance with law. Thereafter, respondent No.3 shall be at liberty to proceed further in the matters in terms of the Government Order dated 26.10.2009.
With the aforesaid directions, the petitions are disposed of.
Sd/- JUDGE GH