IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
J.Nisha Banu, M.Jothiraman, JJ
R.Rajeswari – Appellant
Versus
The Chairman, Tamil Nadu Housing Board – Respondent
W.P.No.24055 of 2024|W.M.P.No.23497 of 2025
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. unauthorized construction requires action by the responsible local authority. (Para 1 , 3) |
| 2. jurisdiction determines which authority engages with the complaint. (Para 2 , 4) |
| 3. court mandates action on representation within a specified timeframe. (Para 5) |
(The order of the Court was made by J.Nisha Banu,J.)
This writ petition has been filed seeking for a direction to the respondents to consider the representation dated 30.05.2024 and to demolish the unauthorized superstructure put up by the 4th respondent in Plot No.2692, Ayyapakkam, Rajammal Street, TNHB, Ayyapakkam, Chennai - 600 077.
2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the 1st and 2nd respondents/Housing Board and the learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the 3rd respondent and perused the materials available on record. Though notice was served on the 4th respondent and the name of the counsel was printed in the cause list, there is no appearance for the 4th respondent.
3.Learned counsel for the petitioner would state that the 4th respondent without any approval from the relevant authorities had constructed superstructure unauthorizedly, encroaching his property and hence, the same has to be demolished. He would further state that the petitioner had already given a representation to the respondents, but so far no action has been taken.
4. It is brought to the notice of the Court by the learned counsel appearing for the respondents that the premises in question, does not come under the jurisdiction of Avadi Municipality and it comes under the jurisdiction of the 3rd respondent. Therefore, only the 3rd respondent has to take action against the unauthorised construction and there is no need to implead the Avadi Muncipality as a party respondent in this writ petition and thus, the implead petition filed by the petitioner in W.M.P.No.23497/2025 may be closed.
5. Considering the the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing on either side, we are of the opinion that it would be suffice to direct the 3rd respondent to consider the representation of the petitioner and to take action in accordance with law. Therefore, the 3rd respondent is directed to consider the representation of the petitioner dated 30.05.2024, after giving opportunity of hearing to the petitioner as well as the 4th respondent and pass appropriate orders and to take action in accordance with law, within a period of twelve weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.