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) 2435

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS 
S.M. SUBRAMANIAM AND K.RAJASEKAR, JJ.
B.Teepikha – Appellant 
Versus
The Secretary to Government – Respondent 
WP No. 20469 of 2024 
Decided on : 22-04-2025 


Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : Mr.S.Anburaja
For the Respondent: Mr.E.Veda Bagath Singh Mr.P.Srinivas, For R4 Mr.S.Ruban Prabu For R6

Court affirmed the necessity to adhere to statutory procedures in addressing unauthorized constructions under local body laws.

Headnote:(A) Tamil Nadu Urban Local Bodies Act, 1998 - Section 135(1) - Writ of Mandamus - Unauthorized construction - Petitioner sought direction to stop unauthorized construction carried out by the respondent - Commissioner acknowledged the issuance of notice for additional unauthorized structure - Court directed respondents to pursue all actions under the Act within 12 weeks. (Paras 2-4)

(B) Court emphasized the importance of following statutory procedures for addressing unauthorized constructions under local body laws.

Facts of the case:
The petitioner claimed unauthorized construction on her property by the respondent, alleging it to be a multi-storey construction, which was contested by the respondent as an incomplete open structure used for parking.

Findings of Court:
The court acknowledged the ongoing action under the Act for unauthorized constructions and directed timely resolution of the matter.

Issues: The central issue was the legitimacy of the construction and whether it violated local body regulations.

Ratio Decidendi: The court asserted that appropriate legal mechanisms must be followed for addressing unauthorized constructions under local acts.

Result: Writ Petition disposed of with directions.

Table of Content
1. writ of mandamus for unauthorized construction. (Para 1)
2. counter-affidavit addressing construction allegations. (Para 2)
3. direction for procedure under the act. (Para 3)
4. writ petition disposed with directions. (Para 4)

ORDER

(Order of the Court was made by S.M.Subramaniam J.)

The writ of mandamus has been instituted to direct the respondents 1 to 5 to consider the petitioner's representation dated 20.03.2024, and to stop unauthorized construction being carried out by the 6th respondent on his property, measuring to an extent of 97.5 m2, comprised in Old Survey No.642, New Survey No.642/2, situated in the 4th Ward, 9th Block, Vadukar Street @ Kalainar Karunanithi Street, Chengalpattu Town.

2. With reference to the allegation set out in the present writ petition, the Commissioner, Chengalpattu Municipality filed counter affidavit. The relevant paragraphs reads as under:

“4. In regard to the complaint of the petitioner in paragraphs 6 and 7 the respondent herein denies the said statements. It is submitted that, firstly there is no parent wall in the site of the petitioner and what is available is only the incomplete columns that are put up at the boundary itself. The 6th respondent is already having a house in his site with the building plan sanction of the year 1993 in BA. No.55/1993 dated 19.05.1993. In addition to the said structure, the 6th respondent has put up an additional structure with RCC columns and roof alone without any floor or side covering in the front and side of his Building, in the nature of a car parking shed or a structure of similar nature. The said structure does not have any flooring or side wall.

5. On receipt of the further complaints of the petitioner, the 6th respondent was issued with the notices under Section 135(1) of the TAMIL NADU URBAN LOCAL BODIES ACT , 1998 for the unauthorized additional construction. There is no multi-storey construction by the 6th respondent as claimed by the petitioner in her affidavit. Only a open structure without any side walls and with columns and RCC roof has been constructed in the manner of a car shed. But under the Act and Rules, the same would be an additional structure and it cannot be put up without an approval. Therefore, appropriate action will be taken against the same.

6. It is humbly submitted that this Respondent will take further action against the unauthorized developments carried out by the 6th respondent by following up the notice already issued under Section 135 (1).”

3. In view of the fact that notice has already been issued by the authority under Section 135(1) of TAMIL NADU URBAN LOCAL BODIES ACT , 1998, the respondents are directed to pursue all further actions by following the procedure as contemplated under the Act. The said exercise is directed to be completed within a period of twelve (12) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

4. With the above directions, the Writ Petition stands disposed of. No costs.

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