AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Matter,Date of Expiry of License,Date of Application for Renewal,
W.P. (C) 9252/2017,31.03.2014,12.04.2017,
W.P. (C) 8143/2017,31.03.2013,05.04.2017,
Matter,Â,"Date of Expiry of
License","Date of Application
for Renewal
Â
W.P. (C)
9016/2017",Petitioner 1,-,29.06.2017
,Petitioner 2,-,29.06.2017
,Petitioner 3,-,30.06.2017
Â
Â
W.P. (C)
7908/2017",Petitioner 1,31.03.2015,31.05.2017
,Petitioner 2,31.03.2015,31.05.2017
,Petitioner 3,31.03.2015,17.4.2017
,Petitioner 4,31.03.2015,26.05.2017
,Petitioner 5,31.03.2015,26.05.2017
,Petitioner 6,31.03.2013,27.03.2017
W.P. (C)
7930/2017",Â,31.03.2006,11.04.2017
Document Description,,,
Photocopy of license,,,
Photocopy of last renewal receipt,,,
Processing fee receipt,,,
Identify Proof,,,
Medical certificate for sputum
and X-ray chest for T.B. stool
for worms and for bacteria, E.
colo, salmonella, shigella and
vibrio cholera",,,
N o dues certificates from
property tax department MCD",,,
Rental Agreement with Rent
Receipts in case of Tenant",,,
Any other document required by
MCD",,,
revenue to the respondent. There should be some consequence of not seeking renewal. To balance the equities, it shall be appropriate that the",,,
license fee / late fee etc. for the period prior to January 1, 2016 is computed as per the rates prevailing then, in terms of policy of 2011 and the same",,,
shall be paid, with interest @ 12% per annum, from the dates, the amount (s) became payable. Â",,,
If on the basis of the computation made above, it is found that in a given case the petitioner has deposited the renewal charges (W.P.(C)",,,
No.8143/2017) which are in excess, the same shall be refunded to the said petitioner. Â",,,
One of the issues raised in the petitions is that for the period between January 01, 2016 and March 06, 2017, the petitioners should be exempted",,,
for renewal/late fee based on the order of the Court dated August 30, 2017 in W.P.(C) 7621/2016. The plea of the ld. Counsel for the respondent",,,
Corporation is that, the petitioners cannot be granted the benefit of the order, as the same relate to such persons / petitioners who had applied during",,,
the said period and their applications stood rejected or were not acted upon only on account of absence of NOC from local councilor. This plea is,,,
not appealing. A perusal of the order dated August 30, 2017 would reveal that in the said case also, this Court was dealing with facts where the",,,
petitioners therein had applied in April â€" May, 2017, like the petitioners herein. The order relied upon, has not been set aside. At least nothing",,,
has been shown in that regard. So it follows, the petitioners are also entitled to the benefit as granted to the petitioners therein, that for renewal of",,,
the licenses of the petitioners w.e.f April 1, 2016 till the expiry of the grace period as is permissible, from the date of issuance of office order dated",,,
March 6, 2017 no late fee shall be chargeable from the petitioners for the renewal of their licenses, subject to the petitioners making payment of other",,,
dues as are permissible as per law or byelaws of the respondent. Â,,,
On payment of the demanded amount, the follow up action shall be taken by the respondent Corporation which shall include de-sealing of the",,,
shops. The directions shall be implemented within a period of two months of receipt of the order. The writ petitions are disposed of, on the above",,,
terms. No costs.Â,,,