High Court · 2024

W.P. No. 30357 of 2018IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRASDATED: 02.02.2024CORAMTHE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE S. VAIDYANATHANANDTHE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE K. RAJASEKARW.P. No. 30357 of 2018&W.M.P. No. 35434 of 2018R. Pandian..PetitionerVs.1.The Commissioner,Greater Chennai Corporation,Ripon Buildings,Chennai – 600 003.2.The Zonal Officer,Zone-X,Greater Chennai Corporation,No.117, N.S.K. Salai,Kodambakkam, Chennai – 600 029.3.The Executive Engineer,Zone-X, Greater Chennai Corporation,No.117, N.S.K. Salai,Kodambakkam, 1\10 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P. No. 30357 of 2018Chennai – 600 029.4.The Assistant Executive Engineer,Unit – 29, Zone X,Greater Chennai Corporation,Vadapalani, Chennai – 600 032.5.The Tahsildar,Egmore – Nungambakkam Taluk,Spurtank Road, Egmore,Chennai – 31.6.The Tahsildar,Mambalam Taluk,Bharathidasan Road,60 Feet Road, West Jafferkhanpet,Chennai – 83.(R5 & R6 are ipleaded as per order dated 15.07.2019 by CJ & MDJ in W.M.P. No.19763 of 2019 in W.P. No. 30257/2018)..RespondentsPrayer:Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India prayingfor issue of a Writ of Certiorari to call for the records of impugned order No.Ma.Aa.10Na. Ka.No. /9198/2018 dated 07.11.2018 on the file of the 2nd respondent and to quash the same.For Petitioner::Mr.S. SankarasubbuFor Respondents::Mr. Ramanlal Addl. Advocate Generalassisted byMr.D.B.R. Prabhu2\10 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P. No. 30357 of 2018ORDER(Made by S. Vaidyanathan,J.)The writ petition is filed challenging the order in Ma.Aa.10Na. Ka.No. /9198/2018 dated 07.11.2018 issued by the 2nd respondent and quash the same.2.The case of the petitioner is that he is the owner of the land and building at Door No.6, 2nd Main Road, Natesan Nagar West, Virugambakkam, Chennai – 600092, of Senjeri Village, Egmore-Nungambakkam Taluk, Chennai District comprised in Grama Natham Survey No.75, New T.S. No. 134, Block No.2, measuring an extent of 2678 sq.ft together with building measuring an extent of 1400 sq.ft and the same was acquired by the petitioner by a deed of settlement dated 12.06.2014 registered as Doc. No. 3867/2014 in the office of the Sub-Registrar, Virugambakkam and ever since the date of settlement, the petitioner is in absolute possession and enjoyment of the schedule property without any hindrance. According to the petitioner, originally, the schedule property belonged to his father, who was in possession and enjoyment of the same for the past more than 70 years and the then Revenue Inspector of Mambalam Firka, Saidapet Taluk, had also issued House site Ownership 3\10 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P. No. 30357 of 2018Certificate dated 25.05.1976 to prove the possession of his father for about 20 years. Further, the petitioner would state that the land tax for the fasli year 1387 and 1382 and also Urban Land Tax for the fasli year 1386 to 1396 have been paid. Apart from that, the respondent Corporation has also assessed the property tax to the schedule property and ever since the date of assessment, the petitioner has been paying all the statutory dues. That being so, the grievance of the petitioner is that respondents 2 to 4, under Section 220 read with Section 222 of Chennai City Municipal Corporation Act, IV of 1919, had issued a notice dated 09.08.2018 asking the petitioner to remove the encroachment made by him on road within a period of seven days from the date of receipt of such notice. Challenging the same, the the petitioner had filed W.P. No. 22081/2018 on various grounds and this Court, by order dated 30.08.2018, taking into account that no opportunity was given to the petitioner to pur forth his version with regard to the encroachment as alleged by the Corporation, directed the 2nd respondent herein to look into the representation, if any, made as a reply to the notice dated 09.08.2018 and to pass a reasoned and speaking order on merits taking into account the objections and relevant material documents within a period of eight weeks. As per the orders of this Court, the petitioner had submitted a detailed representation in the form of reply to the notice on 4\10 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P. No. 30357 of 201810.10.2018 along with enclosures and supporting documents to prove his title to the property to the 1st and 2nd respondents. Based on the said representation, the petitioner was called by the 2nd respondent to appear for an enquiry on 16.10.2018. The petitioner appeared before the 2nd respondent on the said date and submitted his written objections along with supporting documents to establish his title to the property. However, the 2nd respondent passed the impugned order dated 07.11.2018 calling upon the petitioner to vacate and hand over possession of the property as it belongs to the Corporation. Challenging the same, the present writ petition has been filed. 3.The main contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the property has been assessed by the respondent Corporation and that the petitioner has been paying property tax, metro water charges apart from urban land tax. Further, according to the petitioner, he and his father have been in possession of the land for decades together and that the respondent Corporation cannot take over the Government land which is classified as “ Grama Natham”. 4.A detailed counter has been filed by the 2nd respondent/Zonal Officer stating that pursuant to the orders of this Court in the writ petitions 5\10 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P. No. 30357 of 2018filed by encroachers including the petitioner herein directing them to treat the notices, which were under challenge in the writ petitions filed by them, as show cause notices and to submit their reply with supporting documents and further directing the Chennai Corporation to pass orders as per due process of law, the petitioner herein and others submitted their reply and a personal hearing was conducted. Thereafter, on perusal of the revenue records, the impugned order dated 07.11.2018 came to be passed directing the petitioner to remove the encroachment made in the Government Land. The counter affidavit further states that the petitioner had also filed a civil suit in O.S. No. 4309 of 2018 praying for a permanent injunction restraining the defendants herein from disturbing the petitioner's peaceful possession and enjoyment and the same is still pending before the City Civil Court. It is also stated in the counter that the Zonal Officer of zones concerned have been empowered by the Principal Secretary/Commissioner, Corporation of Chennai, by delegating their powers vide proceedings dated 14.11.2014, to take action against the encroachments under Section 222 of the Chennai City Municipal Corporation Act, 1919 and accordingly, the Zonal Officer, Zone X, Greater Chennai Corporation had issued the notice under Section 222 of the Chennai City Municipal Corporatin Act, 1919 to the petitioner and others. It is also categorically stated that the petitioner is an encroacher 6\10 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P. No. 30357 of 2018in the Government land. 5.Heard both sides.6.From a perusal of the impugned order, it is clear that the patta produced by the petitioner itself is a fake one. Moreover, the Tahsildar, Amaindakarai, has conducted field inspection and thereafter, given his report that the land in which the petitioner has constructed his tiled roof house and tea shop are in the road portion belonging to Greater Chennai Corporation with supporting documents, namely, the PLR Register Extract and the Block Map. The relevant portions of the impugned order dated 07.11.2018 is extracted hereunder for useful reference:@ghh;it 7y; fz;Ls;s jh';fshy; tH';fg;gl;l Mtz';fspd; kPJ ftdk; <h;f;fg;gl;ljpy; j';fSf;F brhe;jkhd epyk; vd;gij cWjp bra;a j';fshy; rkh;g;gpf;fg;gl;l @gl;lh@ tpd; cz;ik jd;ikia Ch;$pjk; bra;a[k; bghUl;L tl;lhl;rpah; khk;gyk; jhY}f;fh mth;fSf;F bgUefu brd;id khefuhl;rpapd; K:yk; 27/08/2018 md;W fojk; mDg;gg;gl;lJ/ mjdog;gilapy; tl;lhl;rpah;. khk;gyk; jhY}f;fh mth;fs; nkw;fhQqk; br";nrhp efuk;. khk;gyk; tl;l vy;iy tiuaiuf;F cl;gl;l efuk; ,y;iy/ nkYk; br";nrhp efuk; 2014?Mk; Mz;L tl;l mYtyfk; gphpe;jnghJ mike;jfiu tl;lj;jpw;F cl;gl;l vy;iy tiuaiuapy; cs;sJ vd;gij 7\10 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P. No. 30357 of 2018bjhptpj;Js;shh;/ Vw;fdnt khk;gyk; fpz;o tl;lhl;rpah; mYtyf ty;iyf;Fl;gl;l epiyapy; br";nrhp fpuhkk; ,Ue;jnghJ ,lg;gl;ljhf bjhpfpWJ/ vdnt ,g;gl;lhtpd; cz;ik jd;ik mwpa mike;jfiu tl;lhl;rpah; mYtyfk; K:yk; bjhpe;Jbfhs;syhk; vd bjhptpf;fg;gl;Ls;sJ/,J bjhlh;ghf tl;lhr;rpah;. khk;gyk; jhY}f;fh mth;fs; mspj;j tptuj;jpd; mog;gilapy; tl;lhr;rpah;. mike;jfiu jhY}f;fh mth;fSf;F j';fshy; rkh;g;gpf;fg;gl;l gl;lhtpd; cz;ikj;jd;ikia mwpa 27/08/2018 md;W bgUefu brd;id khefuhl;rp K:yk; fojk; mDg;ggg;gl;lJ/ mf;fojj;jpd; mog;gilapy; tl;lhr;rpah; mike;jfiu jhY}f;fh mth;fs; kPz;Lk; fs Ma;t[ nkw;bfhs;sg;gl;ljpy; jh';fshy; XL tPL kw;Wk; njdPh; fil fl;lg;gl;l ,lk; bgUefu brd;id khefuhl;rpf;F brhe;jkhd rhiy vdt[k; mjw;fhd PLR extract kw;Wk; Block Mapiaa[k; ,izj;J mDg;gpa[s;shh;/Mfnt. nkw;Fwpg;gpl;l Mtz';fspd; mog;gilapy; jh';fshy; vz; 6 nkw;F enlrd; efh; rhiyapy; 3089 r/mo (njhuhakhf) gug;gstpy; fl;lg;gl;l XL tPL kw;Wk; njdPh; fil bgUefu brd;id khefuhl;rpf;F brhe;jkhd rhiyia Mf;fpukpj;J fl;lg;gLs;sPh;fs; vd;gJ Ch;$pjk; Mfpa[s;sikahy; ,f;fojk; fpilf;fg;bgw;w 7 jpd';fSf;Fs; j';fshy; Mf;fpukpg;g[ bra;ag;gl;l XL tPL kw;Wk; njdPh; filapid mfw;wpLkhW nfl;Lf;bfhs;sg;gLfpwJ/////////////”Though it has been stated that a civil suit praying for permanent injunction restraining the official respondents from disturbing the petitioner’s peaceful possession and enjoyment of the property has been 8\10 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P. No. 30357 of 2018filed and the same is pending, pendency of civil suit is not a bar for the authorities to take action in accordance with law. After affording sufficient opportunity, the encroachment has been identified and a detailed order has been passed by the 2nd respondent. We find that there are no merits in the contention of the petitioner and the same is liable to be rejected. The writ petition stands dismissed. The encroachment made by the petitioner will have to be removed within a period of 15 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and the authorities shall take the assistance of Police for removal of encroachment, if required. No costs. Connected W.M.P. is closed.(S.V.N.J.) (K.R.S.J.)nv02.02.2024To1.The Commissioner,Greater Chennai Corporation,Ripon Buildings,Chennai – 600 003.2.The Zonal Officer,Zone-X,Greater Chennai Corporation,No.117, N.S.K. Salai,Kodambakkam, Chennai – 600 029.S. VAIDYANATHAN,J.ANDK. RAJASEKAR,J.9\10 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P. No. 30357 of 2018nv3.The Executive Engineer,Zone-X, Greater Chennai Corporation,No.117, N.S.K. Salai,Kodambakkam, Chennai – 600 029.4.The Assistant Executive Engineer,Unit – 29, Zone X,Greater Chennai Corporation,Vadapalani, Chennai – 600 032.5.The Tahsildar,Egmore – Nungambakkam Taluk,Spurtank Road, Egmore,Chennai – 31.W.P. NO. 30357 of 20186.The Tahsildar,Mambalam Taluk,Bharathidasan Road,60 Feet Road, West Jafferkhanpet,Chennai – 83.02.02.202410\10

W.P. No. 30357 of 2018IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRASDATED: 02.02.2024CORAMTHE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE S. VAIDYANATHANANDTHE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE K. RAJASEKARW.P. No. 30357 of 2018&W.M.P. No. 35434 of 2018R. Pandian..PetitionerVs.1.The Commissioner,Greater Chennai Corporation,Ripon Buildings,Chennai – 600 003.2.The Zonal Officer,Zone-X,Greater Chennai Corporation,No.117, N.S.K. Salai,Kodambakkam, Chennai – 600 029.3.The Executive Engineer,Zone-X, Greater Chennai Corporation,No.117, N.S.K. Salai,Kodambakkam, 1\10 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P. No. 30357 of 2018Chennai – 600 029.4.The Assistant Executive Engineer,Unit – 29, Zone X,Greater Chennai Corporation,Vadapalani, Chennai – 600 032.5.The Tahsildar,Egmore – Nungambakkam Taluk,Spurtank Road, Egmore,Chennai – 31.6.The Tahsildar,Mambalam Taluk,Bharathidasan Road,60 Feet Road, West Jafferkhanpet,Chennai – 83.(R5 & R6 are ipleaded as per order dated 15.07.2019 by CJ & MDJ in W.M.P. No.19763 of 2019 in W.P. No. 30257/2018)..RespondentsPrayer:Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India prayingfor issue of a Writ of Certiorari to call for the records of impugned order No.Ma.Aa.10Na. Ka.No. /9198/2018 dated 07.11.2018 on the file of the 2nd respondent and to quash the same.For Petitioner::Mr.S. SankarasubbuFor Respondents::Mr. Ramanlal Addl. Advocate Generalassisted byMr.D.B.R. Prabhu2\10 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P. No. 30357 of 2018ORDER(Made by S. Vaidyanathan,J.)The writ petition is filed challenging the order in Ma.Aa.10Na. Ka.No. /9198/2018 dated 07.11.2018 issued by the 2nd respondent and quash the same.2.The case of the petitioner is that he is the owner of the land and building at Door No.6, 2nd Main Road, Natesan Nagar West, Virugambakkam, Chennai – 600092, of Senjeri Village, Egmore-Nungambakkam Taluk, Chennai District comprised in Grama Natham Survey No.75, New T.S. No. 134, Block No.2, measuring an extent of 2678 sq.ft together with building measuring an extent of 1400 sq.ft and the same was acquired by the petitioner by a deed of settlement dated 12.06.2014 registered as Doc. No. 3867/2014 in the office of the Sub-Registrar, Virugambakkam and ever since the date of settlement, the petitioner is in absolute possession and enjoyment of the schedule property without any hindrance. According to the petitioner, originally, the schedule property belonged to his father, who was in possession and enjoyment of the same for the past more than 70 years and the then Revenue Inspector of Mambalam Firka, Saidapet Taluk, had also issued House site Ownership 3\10 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P. No. 30357 of 2018Certificate dated 25.05.1976 to prove the possession of his father for about 20 years. Further, the petitioner would state that the land tax for the fasli year 1387 and 1382 and also Urban Land Tax for the fasli year 1386 to 1396 have been paid. Apart from that, the respondent Corporation has also assessed the property tax to the schedule property and ever since the date of assessment, the petitioner has been paying all the statutory dues. That being so, the grievance of the petitioner is that respondents 2 to 4, under Section 220 read with Section 222 of Chennai City Municipal Corporation Act, IV of 1919, had issued a notice dated 09.08.2018 asking the petitioner to remove the encroachment made by him on road within a period of seven days from the date of receipt of such notice. Challenging the same, the the petitioner had filed W.P. No. 22081/2018 on various grounds and this Court, by order dated 30.08.2018, taking into account that no opportunity was given to the petitioner to pur forth his version with regard to the encroachment as alleged by the Corporation, directed the 2nd respondent herein to look into the representation, if any, made as a reply to the notice dated 09.08.2018 and to pass a reasoned and speaking order on merits taking into account the objections and relevant material documents within a period of eight weeks. As per the orders of this Court, the petitioner had submitted a detailed representation in the form of reply to the notice on 4\10 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P. No. 30357 of 201810.10.2018 along with enclosures and supporting documents to prove his title to the property to the 1st and 2nd respondents. Based on the said representation, the petitioner was called by the 2nd respondent to appear for an enquiry on 16.10.2018. The petitioner appeared before the 2nd respondent on the said date and submitted his written objections along with supporting documents to establish his title to the property. However, the 2nd respondent passed the impugned order dated 07.11.2018 calling upon the petitioner to vacate and hand over possession of the property as it belongs to the Corporation. Challenging the same, the present writ petition has been filed. 3.The main contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the property has been assessed by the respondent Corporation and that the petitioner has been paying property tax, metro water charges apart from urban land tax. Further, according to the petitioner, he and his father have been in possession of the land for decades together and that the respondent Corporation cannot take over the Government land which is classified as “ Grama Natham”. 4.A detailed counter has been filed by the 2nd respondent/Zonal Officer stating that pursuant to the orders of this Court in the writ petitions 5\10 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P. No. 30357 of 2018filed by encroachers including the petitioner herein directing them to treat the notices, which were under challenge in the writ petitions filed by them, as show cause notices and to submit their reply with supporting documents and further directing the Chennai Corporation to pass orders as per due process of law, the petitioner herein and others submitted their reply and a personal hearing was conducted. Thereafter, on perusal of the revenue records, the impugned order dated 07.11.2018 came to be passed directing the petitioner to remove the encroachment made in the Government Land. The counter affidavit further states that the petitioner had also filed a civil suit in O.S. No. 4309 of 2018 praying for a permanent injunction restraining the defendants herein from disturbing the petitioner's peaceful possession and enjoyment and the same is still pending before the City Civil Court. It is also stated in the counter that the Zonal Officer of zones concerned have been empowered by the Principal Secretary/Commissioner, Corporation of Chennai, by delegating their powers vide proceedings dated 14.11.2014, to take action against the encroachments under Section 222 of the Chennai City Municipal Corporation Act, 1919 and accordingly, the Zonal Officer, Zone X, Greater Chennai Corporation had issued the notice under Section 222 of the Chennai City Municipal Corporatin Act, 1919 to the petitioner and others. It is also categorically stated that the petitioner is an encroacher 6\10 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P. No. 30357 of 2018in the Government land. 5.Heard both sides.6.From a perusal of the impugned order, it is clear that the patta produced by the petitioner itself is a fake one. Moreover, the Tahsildar, Amaindakarai, has conducted field inspection and thereafter, given his report that the land in which the petitioner has constructed his tiled roof house and tea shop are in the road portion belonging to Greater Chennai Corporation with supporting documents, namely, the PLR Register Extract and the Block Map. The relevant portions of the impugned order dated 07.11.2018 is extracted hereunder for useful reference:@ghh;it 7y; fz;Ls;s jh';fshy; tH';fg;gl;l Mtz';fspd; kPJ ftdk; <h;f;fg;gl;ljpy; j';fSf;F brhe;jkhd epyk; vd;gij cWjp bra;a j';fshy; rkh;g;gpf;fg;gl;l @gl;lh@ tpd; cz;ik jd;ikia Ch;$pjk; bra;a[k; bghUl;L tl;lhl;rpah; khk;gyk; jhY}f;fh mth;fSf;F bgUefu brd;id khefuhl;rpapd; K:yk; 27/08/2018 md;W fojk; mDg;gg;gl;lJ/ mjdog;gilapy; tl;lhl;rpah;. khk;gyk; jhY}f;fh mth;fs; nkw;fhQqk; br";nrhp efuk;. khk;gyk; tl;l vy;iy tiuaiuf;F cl;gl;l efuk; ,y;iy/ nkYk; br";nrhp efuk; 2014?Mk; Mz;L tl;l mYtyfk; gphpe;jnghJ mike;jfiu tl;lj;jpw;F cl;gl;l vy;iy tiuaiuapy; cs;sJ vd;gij 7\10 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P. No. 30357 of 2018bjhptpj;Js;shh;/ Vw;fdnt khk;gyk; fpz;o tl;lhl;rpah; mYtyf ty;iyf;Fl;gl;l epiyapy; br";nrhp fpuhkk; ,Ue;jnghJ ,lg;gl;ljhf bjhpfpWJ/ vdnt ,g;gl;lhtpd; cz;ik jd;ik mwpa mike;jfiu tl;lhl;rpah; mYtyfk; K:yk; bjhpe;Jbfhs;syhk; vd bjhptpf;fg;gl;Ls;sJ/,J bjhlh;ghf tl;lhr;rpah;. khk;gyk; jhY}f;fh mth;fs; mspj;j tptuj;jpd; mog;gilapy; tl;lhr;rpah;. mike;jfiu jhY}f;fh mth;fSf;F j';fshy; rkh;g;gpf;fg;gl;l gl;lhtpd; cz;ikj;jd;ikia mwpa 27/08/2018 md;W bgUefu brd;id khefuhl;rp K:yk; fojk; mDg;ggg;gl;lJ/ mf;fojj;jpd; mog;gilapy; tl;lhr;rpah; mike;jfiu jhY}f;fh mth;fs; kPz;Lk; fs Ma;t[ nkw;bfhs;sg;gl;ljpy; jh';fshy; XL tPL kw;Wk; njdPh; fil fl;lg;gl;l ,lk; bgUefu brd;id khefuhl;rpf;F brhe;jkhd rhiy vdt[k; mjw;fhd PLR extract kw;Wk; Block Mapiaa[k; ,izj;J mDg;gpa[s;shh;/Mfnt. nkw;Fwpg;gpl;l Mtz';fspd; mog;gilapy; jh';fshy; vz; 6 nkw;F enlrd; efh; rhiyapy; 3089 r/mo (njhuhakhf) gug;gstpy; fl;lg;gl;l XL tPL kw;Wk; njdPh; fil bgUefu brd;id khefuhl;rpf;F brhe;jkhd rhiyia Mf;fpukpj;J fl;lg;gLs;sPh;fs; vd;gJ Ch;$pjk; Mfpa[s;sikahy; ,f;fojk; fpilf;fg;bgw;w 7 jpd';fSf;Fs; j';fshy; Mf;fpukpg;g[ bra;ag;gl;l XL tPL kw;Wk; njdPh; filapid mfw;wpLkhW nfl;Lf;bfhs;sg;gLfpwJ/////////////”Though it has been stated that a civil suit praying for permanent injunction restraining the official respondents from disturbing the petitioner’s peaceful possession and enjoyment of the property has been 8\10 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P. No. 30357 of 2018filed and the same is pending, pendency of civil suit is not a bar for the authorities to take action in accordance with law. After affording sufficient opportunity, the encroachment has been identified and a detailed order has been passed by the 2nd respondent. We find that there are no merits in the contention of the petitioner and the same is liable to be rejected. The writ petition stands dismissed. The encroachment made by the petitioner will have to be removed within a period of 15 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and the authorities shall take the assistance of Police for removal of encroachment, if required. No costs. Connected W.M.P. is closed.(S.V.N.J.) (K.R.S.J.)nv02.02.2024To1.The Commissioner,Greater Chennai Corporation,Ripon Buildings,Chennai – 600 003.2.The Zonal Officer,Zone-X,Greater Chennai Corporation,No.117, N.S.K. Salai,Kodambakkam, Chennai – 600 029.S. VAIDYANATHAN,J.ANDK. RAJASEKAR,J.9\10 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P. No. 30357 of 2018nv3.The Executive Engineer,Zone-X, Greater Chennai Corporation,No.117, N.S.K. Salai,Kodambakkam, Chennai – 600 029.4.The Assistant Executive Engineer,Unit – 29, Zone X,Greater Chennai Corporation,Vadapalani, Chennai – 600 032.5.The Tahsildar,Egmore – Nungambakkam Taluk,Spurtank Road, Egmore,Chennai – 31.W.P. NO. 30357 of 20186.The Tahsildar,Mambalam Taluk,Bharathidasan Road,60 Feet Road, West Jafferkhanpet,Chennai – 83.02.02.202410\10