SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Mad) 2411

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
S.M. Subramaniam, K.Rajasekar, JJ.
Akkalaneni Anish - Petitioner
Versus
Government of Tamil Nadu, Represented by its Additional Secretary to Government, Housing and Urban Development Department and ors. – Respondents
W.P.No.13077 of 2025 and W.M.P.No.14595 of 2025
Decided On : 09-04-2025

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioner: Mr.D.S.Raja Sekaran, for Mr.K.Sivasubramanian
For the Respondent: Mr.E.Veda Bagath Singh, Special Government Pleader, Mr. D.B.R. Prabhu, Standing Counsel for Greater Chennai Corporation

The court affirmed that unauthorized construction entails dismissal of writ petitions, upholding enforcement actions under planning regulations.

Headnote:(A) Town and Country Planning Act, Tamil Nadu - Section 80-A - Rejection of revision petition alleging unauthorized construction - The writ petition is dismissed as the building was found constructed in violation of building plan permission, and enforcement actions were completed. (Paras 2 and 5)

(B) Writ Jurisdiction - Scope - Court does not entertain writ petitions if unauthorized construction is established, emphasizing the necessity for compliance with building regulations. (Paras 2 and 5)

Facts of the case:
The petitioner, a tenant, challenged the government's rejection of a revision petition against actions taken for unauthorized construction on the property, which was also contested by the owner.

Findings of Court:
The Court directed the petitioner to vacate the premises by June 10, 2025, confirming that enforcement actions should be concluded within six weeks if not complied.

Issues: Whether the writ petition should be entertained despite established unauthorized construction and the challenge to enforcement actions.

Ratio Decidendi: The court noted that the unauthorized construction was a key factor in dismissing the writ petition, reinforcing that compliance with planning regulations cannot be overlooked.

Result: Writ Petition dismissed.

Table of Content
1. government actions against unauthorized construction (Para 1 , 2)
2. petitioner's request for time to vacate (Para 3)
3. court's directive for enforcement of demolition (Para 4)
4. dismissal of writ petition (Para 5)

ORDER :

S.M.SUBRAMANIAM, J.

The order of rejection passed by the Government vide letter dated 01.04.2025 under Section 80 -A of the Town and Country Planning Act is sought to be assailed in the present writ proceedings.

2. It is not in dispute that the authorities identified unauthorised construction in the subject property. Enforcement actions were initiated. The writ petitioner is a tenant. The owner of the premises Smt.Kasturi also filed a revision petition under Section 80 -A of the Tamil Nadu Town and Country Planning Act before the Government and the said revision petition was rejected along with the revision petition filed by the writ petitioner by way of a common order, which is impugned in the present writ proceedings.

3. Since the subject building was found to be unauthorisedly constructed in violation of the building plan permission and the enforcement actions have already been completed by the authorities, this Court is not inclined to entertain the writ petition. That apart, the revision petition under Section 80 -A of the Act was rejected.

3. Mr.D.S.Raja Sekaran, learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner/tenant will vacate the premises and some time may be granted.

4. In view of the said submission, the petitioner is directed to vacate the premises on or before the June 10, 2025. In the event of failure the respondent authorities are directed to conclude the enforcement actions and demolish the unauthorised constructions without granting any further time to the occupants. The entire exercise of completion of enforcement action is directed to be concluded within a period of six (6) weeks from 10th June 2025.

5. With the above directions, the Writ Petition stands dismissed. No costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top