IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 27.06.2025 CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.SUNDAR and THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR W.P.No.27358 of 2024 and W.M.P.No.29852 of 2024

1. Nelson Chambers Flat Owners Association A Block represented by its Secretary Venkatesh Hariharan

115 Nelson Manickam Road Aminjikarai Chennai 600 029

2. Nelson Chambers C Block Owners Association represented by its Secretary Pradeep Samuel

115 Nelson Manickam Road Aminjikarai Chennai 600 029

3. Nelson Chambers D Block Owners Association represented by its Secretary Mallikharjuna Roa G

115 Nelson Manickam Road Aminjikarai Chennai 600 029

4. E. Chandrasekar

5. D. Raja Reddy

6. StoneMart Cladding Systems represented by its Authorised Signatory S. Nagarajan E Block

115 Nelson Manickam Road Aminjikarai Chennai 600 029 Petitioners vs.

1. The Commissioner Greater Corporation of Chennai Ripon Building Chennai 600 003

2. The Assistant Commissioner Zone-8 Greater Chennai Corporation Chennai Respondents Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a writ of mandamus directing the respondent to consider the petitioner's representation dated 25.08.2024 and consequently, forbear the respondents from disturbing the peaceful possession of the private pathway in T.S.No.2 in R.S.No.14/2 (part) in O.S.No.14/A and 14/B in Vada Agaram Village of Aminjikarai Taluk, Chennai District, without following the due process of law.

For petitioners Mr. C. Vigneswaran For respondents Mr. A. Arun Babu Standing Counsel - - - - -

ORDER

[made by M.SUNDAR, J.]

Two notices, both dated 20.08.2024, bearing reference nos.O.8.No.E1/2024 and Z.O.8No.E1/234/2024 [hereinafter collectively 'said notices' for the sake of convenience and clarity] constitute the epicentre of the captioned main 'writ petition'

[hereinafter 'WP' for the sake of brevity].

2. A scanned reproduction of said notices is as follows:

3. Caption to the said notices say that the same have been issued under Section 128 of 'The Tamil Nadu Urban Local Bodies Act, 1998 (Act 9 of 1999)' [hereinafter 'TNULB Act' for the sake of convenience and clarity].

4. Mr. C. Vigneswaran, learned counsel on record for writ petitioners and Mr. A. Arun Babu, learned Standing Counsel for Greater Chennai Corporation [hereinafter 'GCC' for the sake of convenience and clarity] (RR 1 & 2) are before us.

5. Aforesaid learned counsel on both sides consented to have the captioned main WP taken up and heard out. We do so.

6. After hearing both sides for some time, it came to light that writ petitioners have construed said notices as show cause notices (SCNs) and sent independent replies (two replies), both dated 25.08.2024. To be noted, replies are also in the nature of representations.

7. Captioned main WP has been filed with a mandamus prayer to consider the replies/representations of the writ petitioners dated 25.08.2024 and consequently, to forbear the respondents from disturbing the possession of writ petitioners qua properties which constitute the subject matter of said notices, which we have described as the epicentre of the captioned main WP.

8. Notwithstanding myriad grounds raised in the writ affidavit, it came to light that a jurisdiction issue arises in the matter. This issue arises because said notices have been issued by R2 (Assistant Commissioner, GCC). As already alluded to supra, said notices mention that the same have been issued under Section 128 of the TNULB Act which reads as follows:

'128. Power to remove encroachment from public place. - (1) The Commissioner may, -

(a) remove without any notice any movable temporary structure, enclosure, stall, booth, any article whatsoever hawked, exposed or displayed for sale or any other thing whatsoever by way of encroaching street, public place, water body, tank, other water resources or any land belonging to or vested with the municipality with the municipal limit;

(b) remove any immovable structure whether permanent or of temporary nature encroaching str