IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 28-11-2025 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V. LAKSHMINARAYANAN and WMP No. 50901 of 2025 A.Vimal Menon Petitioner(s)

Vs

1. The District Revenue Officer, Secretary-cum-General Manager, Chennai Metropolitan Water Supply And Sewerage Board, No.1,Pumping Station Road, Chintadripet, Chennai - 600 002

2.The Area Engineer, Zone-XI, Chennai Metropolitan Water Supply And Sewerage Board, No.8A, Gangai Amman Koil Street, Alapakkam, Chennai 600 116.

3.The Commissioner, Greater Chennai Corporation, Ripon Building, Periamet, Chennai 600 003.

Respondent(s)

PRAYER directing the 1st and 2nd respondents to accept the application for a new Water and Sewerage Service Connection and provide the supply to the Petitioner for the premises situated at No.12A, Kuppusamy Naicker Street, Poothapedu, Porur, Chennai 600 116, after collecting necessary charges as prescribed within a time limit.

For Petitioner(s): Mr.V.B.R.Menon For Respondent(s) Ms.Vasanthamala (R1 & R2)

Ms.Vanitha Joice Rani (R3)

O R D E R

The petitioner is the owner of the property situated at No.12A, Kuppusamy Naicker Street, Poothapedu, Porur, Chennai-600116. A demand of water charges made to a tune of Rs.81,528/-. This was on the basis of the revision of property tax by the Greater Chennai Corporation. In terms of the applicable Rules and Regulations, when the property tax is revised, 7% of the said amount is charged by the CMWSSB.

2. The petitioner filed W.P. No. 23966 of 2024 seeking to quash the revision of tax by the Greater Chennai Corporation. After hearing both sides, the writ petition came to be allowed quashing the tax assessment. A further directions was given to the Greater Chennai Corporation to re-do the exercise afresh. As the substratum of the claim made by the CMWSSB has been set aside by this Court, the petitioner, who claims not in arrears of the tax calculation on the basis of the past property tax, sought water connection. He sent an e-mail to the CMWSSB to the aforesaid effect. He was informed that the website of CMWSSB shows arrears and therefore, till that amount is cleared, the property will not be benefitted with water connection. Hence, he is before this Court by way of the present writ.

3. When the matter came up for admission, Ms.Deepika took notice for R1 and R2 and Ms.Vanitha Joice Rani took notice for R3. Ms.Deepika sought time for instructions.

4. On the next day, when the matter was taken up on 26.11.2025, in the forenoon, Ms.Vasanthamala appeared and sought time for instructions again. Post lunch, Mr.J.Ravindran, learned Additional Advocate General appeared on behalf of Ms.Vasanthamala. He reported that appropriate steps would be taken and the same would be informed to this Court today(28.11.2025).

5. When the matter was taken up today, Ms.Vasanthamala states that an off-line application from the petitioner will be received and water connection will be offered to the petitioner's premises, within a period of 10 days therefrom. She also states an indemnity bond should be executed by the petitioner that, in case of revision by the Greater Chennai Corporation, he will clear the arrears, which would be calculated on the basis of the property tax fixed by that authority.

6. While the first portion of her submission is certainly appreciated, qua the later portion, I am not inclined to direct the petitioner to file an indemnity bond. This is the case, the petitioner has already filed an affidavit of undertaking dated 25.11.2025 which is scanned and extracted hereunder:-

"

7. In paragraph No.5 of the affidavit of undertaking, the petitioner has clearly stated that within 24 hours from the date of the receipt of the written communication from CMWSSB as regards revision if any, he will clear the same.

8. When an affidavit of undertaking has been given to this Court to call upon the petitioner to give an other indemnity to an Executive Authority does not arise.

9. The statement of Mr.VBR Menon, that the application will be filed by