"Grossly Abused Jurisdiction Of PIL": Madras High Court Imposes 75K Cost On Litigant For Stalling Revenue Collection

The Madras High Court recently imposed a cost of Rs. 75,000 on a litigant for misusing the jurisdiction of public interest litigation and approaching the court for stalling a revenue collection process by the Kodaikanal municipality.The bench of Justice G Jayachandran and Justice S Srimathy noted that the litigant had attempted to project his private interest as a public interest and attempted to stall the collection of revenue.“This Court, on perusing the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition, finds that it is a private interest of the writ petitioner which is projected as a public interest with an intention to stall the process of collecting revenue by enhancing the property tax by virtue of a general guideline,” the court observed.The court was dealing with a writ petition filed by Baskar Vincent challenging the enhancement of tax by the Kodaikanal municipality for his residential building. Thus, he had approached the court challenging the general revision effected by the Municipal Corporation.The Municipality opposed the plea by contending that the Tamil Nadu Urban Local Bodies provides for appeal remedy if any assessee is aggrieved by enhancement of tax. Thus, it was submitted that if the petitioner was aggrieved, he could use statutory remedies under the Act and the public interest litigation was an abuse of process of law.The Government Pleader also submitted that the instructions given by the Director of Municipal Administration have been wrongly interpreted by the petitioner.The court noted that the petitioner had converted his residential premises to a commercial one by letting it out as homestay. Thus, the court noted that the petitioner was attempting to stymie the economic flow of the local body by camouflaging his grievance as public interest litigation.The court thus dismissed the plea as directed the petitioner to pay Rs. 75,000 as cost to the Kodaikanal municipality.Counsel for the Petitioner: Mr.G. Prabhu RajaduraiCounsel for the Respondent: Mr. P. Thilakkumar Govt. Pleader (for R1), Mr.T.S.Mohammed Mohideen Standing Counsel (for R2)Case Title: Baskar Vincent v. Director of Municipal Administration and anotherCitation: 2025 LiveLaw (Mad) 154Case No: W.P.(MD)No.9772 of 2025Click Here To Read/Download The Judgment

"Grossly Abused Jurisdiction Of PIL": Madras High Court Imposes 75K Cost On Litigant For Stalling Revenue Collection

Upasana Sajeev

Tags