The court emphasized ensuring safety in property matters and the necessity of conducting site inspections before demolition orders.

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 29.08.2025 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.SARAVANAN W.P(MD)No.23559 of 2025 Mohammed Bilal ... Petitioner Vs.

The Commissioner, Thiruchendur Municipality, Thoothukkudi District. ...Respondent Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India , praying this Court to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondent herein to issue demolition order with respect to the dilapidated building in New Natham S.No.1464/43 beaing Door Nos.148, 150, 150/1, 150/2, 150/3, 150/4, 150/5, 150/6, 150/7, 150/8 in North Mart Street, KeelaThiruchendur village,Thiruchendur Taluk,Thoothukudi District by considering the petitioner's representation dated 29.08.2024 and pass appropriate orders within a time stipulated by this Court.

For Petitioner : Mr.S.Vashik Ali For Respondent : Mr.H.Arumugam Standing Counsel

ORDER

This writ petition has been filed for a writ of Mandamus to direct the respondent herein to issue demolition order with respect to the dilapidated building in New Natham S.No.1464/43 beaing Door Nos.148, 150, 150/1, 150/2, 150/3, 150/4, 150/5, 150/6, 150/7, 150/8 in North Mart Street, KeelaThiruchendur village,Thiruchendur Taluk,Thoothukudi District by considering the petitioner's representation dated 29.08.2024.

2. The petitioner claims to have purchsed the property in the year 2024 in new Natham S.No.1464/43. According to the petitioner, the building is more than 70 years and is in dilapidated condition and therefore, it has to be demolished for putting up a new construction.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there are several tenants occupying the property. Since the property is in dilapidated condition, there is a risk involved if the building is allowed to remain.

4. The learned Standing Counsel for the respondent submits that the writ petition is without any merits, as the petitioner has not impleaded any of the tenants, who are residing in the building purchased by the petitioner in the year

2024.

5. Be that as it may, I am inclined to direct the respondent to depute a senior official from the Department, having the requisite qualifications to do a site inspection after due notice to all the tenants. The said Office thereafter shall certify whether the building is indeed in a dilapidated condition warrants demolition or whether the petitioenr is using this as a ruse to evict the occupants of the premises purchased by the petitioner in the year 2024 vide registered Document No.1294 of 2024. This exercise shall be completed within a period of

8 weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.