SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 3801

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Honourable The CHIEF JUSTICE
R.Subramani – Appellant
Versus
Karuppasamy – Respondent



##PAGE1##

WA No.173 of 2026

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 29.01.2026

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR.MANINDRA MOHAN SHRIVASTAVA,

CHIEF JUSTICE

AND

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE G.ARUL MURUGAN

Writ Appeal No.173 of 2026

and CMP Nos.1535 and 1537 of 2026

1. R.Subramani

2. R.Gurusamy

3. R.Manimegalai .. Appellants

-vs-

1. Karuppasamy

2. Rathina Sabapathy

3. The Commissioner

HR & CE Department,

Nungambakkam, Chennai 600 034.

4. The Joint Commissioner,

HR & CE Department,

Cotton Market Complex,

Palladam Road, Tiruppur District 641 604.

5. The Assistant Commissioner,

HR & CE Department,

Arulmigu Veeraragava Perumal Kovil Street,

Near Old Bus Stand, Tiruppur District 641 604.

6. The Inspector

Page 1 of 4

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 30/01/2026 04:16:25 pm )

##PAGE2##

WA No.173 of 2026

HR & CE Department,

Palladam, Tiruppur District 641 664.

7. The Fit Person,

Arulmigu Varadharaja Perumal Temple,

Samalapuram Village, Palladam Taluk,

Tiruppur District 641 663. .. Respondents

Prayer: Appeal filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent against the

order dated 19.08.2025 passed in W.P.No.31232 of 2025 on the file of

this Court.

For Appellants : Mr.A.Rajeshkanna

For Respondents : Mr.Sithirai Anandam

for RR 1 and 2

: Mr.N.R.R.Arun Natarajan

Spl. Govt. Pleader

for RR 3 to 7

* * * * *

JUDGMENT

(Judgment of the Court was

delivered by the Hon'ble Chief Justice)

With the consent of the parties, the case is heard finally at this

stage itself.

2. The sole ground to challenge the legality and validity of the

order passed by the Writ Court is that even though the appellants

were impleaded as parties in the writ petition and the subject matter

Page 2 of 4

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 30/01/2026 04:16:25 pm )

##PAGE3##

WA No.173 of 2026

of the writ petition involved property, which was in occupation of the

appellants, they were not given any opportunity of hearing, as no

notices were issued and the order was passed.

3. Learned counsel for the respondents concededly submitted

that the matter may be remanded for hearing afresh.

4. In view of the submission made and that the order impugned

was passed without giving any notice to the appellants or affording

any opportunity of hearing, the order is set aside. The Writ Appeal is

allowed and the Writ Petition is restored to its original number.

There shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, the interim

applications stand closed.

(MANINDRA MOHAN SHRIVASTAVA, CJ.) (G.ARUL MURUGAN, J.)

29.01.2026

Index : Yes/No

Neutral Citation : Yes/No

sra

Page 3 of 4

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 30/01/2026 04:16:25 pm )

##PAGE4##

WA No.173 of 2026

THE HON'BLE CHIEF JUSTICE

AND

G.ARUL MURUGAN, J.

(sra)

To

1. The Commissioner

HR & CE Department,

Nungambakkam, Chennai 600 034.

2. The Joint Commissioner,

HR & CE Department, Cotton Market Complex,

Palladam Road, Tiruppur District 641 604.

3. The Assistant Commissioner,

HR & CE Department,

Arulmigu Veeraragava Perumal Kovil Street,

Near Old Bus Stand, Tiruppur District 641 604.

4. The Inspector

HR & CE Department,

Palladam, Tiruppur District 641 664.

WA No.173 of 2026

29.01.2026

Page 4 of 4

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 30/01/2026 04:16:25 pm )

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