Judgment · High Court
Case at a glance
- Bench
- S S SUNDAR
Outcome
Disposed of
(8)The writ petition stands disposed of
Provisions considered
Key paragraphs
- Para 66.M/s.Muthu Mahabooth Salima ... RespondentsPrayer : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of Writ of mandamus directing the 1st respondent to dispose of the petitioner's representation dated 30.01.2023 to mark and measure the boundaries of the common pathway…
Judgment
WP.No.22688/2023IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRASDATED : 04.01.2024CORAM :THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.S. SUNDARANDTHE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N.SENTHILKUMARWP.No.22688/2023Thajin Beevi... PetitionerVs.
The Managing Director Tamil Nadu Urban Habitat Development Board No.5, Kamarajar Salai, Chepauk, Chennai 600 005. [Land Mark: Near Vivekananda House]
The Estate Officer Tamil Nadu Urban Habitat Development Board [Nehru Nagar Phase-I, Velachery] K.K.Nagar, Sivalingapuram Chennai 600 078.
The Chennai Corporation Commissioner Greater Chennai Corporation Rippon Building, Chennai 600 003.
The Regional Deputy Commissioner-South1 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis WP.No.22688/2023 Greater Chennai Corporation Zone XIII Brindavan Road, Velachery Chennai 600 042.
The Assistant Engineer 175th Ward, Greater Chennai Corporation Brindavan Road, Velachery Chennai 600 042.
M/s.Muthu Mahabooth Salima ... RespondentsPrayer : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of Writ of mandamus directing the 1st respondent to dispose of the petitioner's representation dated 30.01.2023 to mark and measure the boundaries of the common pathway to the petitioner's plot No.177 as per the respondent's approved Township Plan and to remove the unauthorised construction made by the 6th respondent schedule herein within the stipuated time period to be fixed by this Court. For Petitioner: Mr.V.Ramesh KumarFor RR 1 & 2 : Mr.Babu Muthu MeeranFor RR 3 to 5: Mr.D.B.R.Prabhu, Standing counselFor R6: Mr.G.Vijayakumar2 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis WP.No.22688/2023ORDER[Order of the Court was made by S.S.SUNDAR, J.,](1)The present writ petition has been filed seeking for issuance of a writ of mandamus to direct the 1st respondent to dispose of the petitioner's representation dated 30.01.2023 to mark and measure the boundaries of the common pathway to the petitioner's plot No.177 as per the respondent's approved Township Plan and to remove the unauthorised construction made by the 6th respondent herein.
(2)Brief facts that are necessary for the disposal of this writ petition are as follows: (3)The petitioner got allotment of Plot No.177 at Nehru Nagar, Velachery, from the 1st respondent. The adjacent plot owner, namely, the 6th respondent herein, appears to have put up a wall in the common passage and the construction appears to be one to connect the whole building with a dividing wall which was constructed by the 6th respondent in the common passage. As a result, the petitioner who is entitled to use the entire 6 feet passage, is deprived of her right and the pathway which was 3 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis WP.No.22688/2023with a width of 6 feet, has now been reduced by the offending construction put up by the 6th respondent. It is in the said circumstances, the petitioner appears to have made a representation. Since the representation of the petitioner dated 30.01.2023 has not been considered, the petitioner has approached this Court by filing the present writ petition.
(4)The learned counsel for the respondents 1 and 2 has filed a counter affidavit referring to the encroachment by the 6th respondent to an extent of 23.32 sq.m. in Plot No.177 which is actually allotted to the petitioner herein. The 1st respondent appears to have issued Form-A Notice on 21.11.2023 under the Tamil Nadu Slum Areas Improvement Act, 1971, calling upon the 6th respondent to remove the encroachment. (5)The learned counsel for the 6th respondent however submitted that a dividing wall was constructed originally pursuant to the internal arrangement with all the neighbouring land owners and that, there is no encroachment by the 6th respondent. However, the learned counsel admits that the construction put up by the 6th respondent has now reduced the width of passage from 6 feet to 2 feet.4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis WP.No.22688/2023(6)The 6th respondent has not produced any document or material to vouch that all the other neighbouring land / plot owners have agreed for such a construction encroaching into the common passage and the area allotted to the petitioner herein.
Operative part
(7)In such circumstances, this Court is inclined to issue the following directions:-(a)The 1st respondent is directed to consider and dispose of the petitioner's representation dated 30.01.2023 after making reliable inspection and after hearing the parties. Since the encroachment of the 6th respondent is admitted, the official respondents shall take action in accordance with law and pull down the structure after confirming the exact encroachment or the unauthorised construction by the 6th respondent following due process of law within a period of fourteen weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. (b)The 1st respondent shall also file a Compliance Report on 15.04.2024.(8)The writ petition stands disposed of. No costs.[S.S.S.R., J.] [N.S., J.] 04.01.2024AP5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis WP.No.22688/2023Internet : YesTo1.The Managing Director Tamil Nadu Urban Habitat Development Board No.5, Kamarajar Salai, Chepauk, Chennai 600 005. [Land Mark: Near Vivekananda House]2.The Estate Officer Tamil Nadu Urban Habitat Development Board [Nehru Nagar Phase-I, Velachery] K.K.Nagar, Sivalingapuram Chennai 600 078.3.The Chennai Corporation Commissioner Greater Chennai Corporation Rippon Building, Chennai 600 003.4.The Regional Deputy Commissioner-South Greater Chennai Corporation Zone XIII Brindavan Road, Velachery Chennai 600 042.5.The Assistant Engineer 175th Ward, Greater Chennai Corporation Brindavan Road, Velachery Chennai 600 042.6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis WP.No.22688/2023S.S. SUNDAR, J., andN.SENTHILKUMAR, J.,APWp.No.22688/202304.01.20247
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: (8)The writ petition stands disposed of
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Constitution of India — art. 226; Tamil Nadu Slum Areas Improvement Act, 1971.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.