Sakthikumar. K v. The Commissioner

ORDER The present writ petition has been filed seeking a mandamus to refund the security deposit made by the petitioner, namely, Rs.10,00,000/- for the license granted to him to collect fee in the new bus stand for the pay and use modern latrine.

¶2The petitioner herein was granted licence by the respondents Municipal Corporation for collecting user fee for the modern latrine and bathroom in Melapalayam Region, Tirunelveli City Municipal Corporation for the period between 01.04.2013 and 31.03.2016.

¶3By the orders of this Court in W.P.(MD)No.4738 of 2015, 1222 and 2566 of 2016 dated 11.03.2016, the period of the petitioner was extended upto

30.06.2016. The petitioner was directed to handover possession to the Corporation in the midnight of 30.06.2016. A perusal of the said order further reveals that the Corporation has to refund the security deposit once the possession is handed over to the Corporation.

¶4According to the learned Counsel appearing for the writ petitioner, possession has been handed over to the Corporation as early as on 30.06.2016. Even thereafter, the security deposit of Rs.10,00,000/- has not been refunded. Hence, the present writ petition.

¶5The learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondents Corporation submitted that during the tenure of the petitioner, there was serious allegation against him and action has been initiated and therefore, the question of refund of security deposit would not arise.

¶6I have considered the submissions made on either side and perused the materials available on record.

¶7During the tenure of the writ petitioner as a licensee, due to allegations, the license was cancelled and it was put to challenge before this Court and it was set aside. In fact, the petitioner's tenure was extended for a further period of three months by an order of this Court. In the said order, it has been categorically pointed out that as and when the petitioner hands over the possession to the Corporation, the security deposit has to be refunded. In such circumstances, the contention of the respondent Corporation cannot be countenanced.

¶8In view of the above said facts, the respondents Corporation are directed to refund the security deposit of Rs.10,00,000/- (Rupees Ten Lakhs only) to the writ petitioner within a period of 6(six) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶9Accordingly, this writ petition stands allowed to the extent as stated above. No costs.

13.02.2026 NCC : Yes/No Index : Yes/No Internet: Yes/No RJR To

¶1The Commissioner, Tirunelveli City Municipal Corporation, Tirunelveli.

¶2The Assistant Commissioner, Melapalayam Region, Tirunelveli City Municipal Corporation, Tirunelveli. R.VIJAYAKUMAR

, J.

RJR W.P.(MD)No.2269 of 2023

13.02.2026

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 13.02.2026 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE R.VIJAYAKUMAR W.P.(MD)No.2269 of 2023 K.Sakthikumar ...Petitioner Vs 1. The Commissioner, Tirunelveli City Municipal Corporation, Tirunelveli. 2. The Assistant Commissioner, Melapalayam Region, Tirunelveli City Municipal Corporation, Tirunelveli. ...Respondents PRAYER: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents to refund the deposit of Rupees Ten Lakhs (Rs.10,00,000/-) paid by the petitioner on 04.04.2016 which has been paid in excess to amount fixed for the license fee for three years period from 01.04.2013 to 31.03.2016 for the license granted to collect fee in New bus stand and pay use modern latrine and bathroom, Melapalayam Region, Tirunelveli City Municipal Corporation within a time frame fixed by this Court. For Petitioner : M/s.A.Sivasubramanian For Respondents : M/s.A.Sivanupandian Government Advocate