IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 02-02-2026 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE V. LAKSHMINARAYANAN WP No. 1955 of 2026 T.Jayachandran ..Petitioner(s)

Vs.

1. The Collector Thiruvallur district, Office of the District collector, Thiruvallur.

2. The Commissioner Town and Country Planning authority, Opp. to LIC Building, Anna Salai, Chennai 02.

3. The Assistant Director Town and Country Planning authority, Thiruvallur Division, No. 43/397 II floor, Indira Gandhi Salai, Rajajipuram Part II, Thiruvallur District.

4. The Block Development Officer, Block Development Office, Thiruvallur. .. Respondents Prayer : This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records of the 3^rd respondent in its proceedings Na.Ka.No.1793/2025/Thiruvallur-2 dated 03.11.2025, and also the impugned order dated 24.04.2024 in Proceedings No.Oo/Mu/MP/1082/24/Thiruvallur-2 rejecting the regularisation application dated 15.02.2024 submitted by S.Jayakumar and others for regularisation of housing plots.

(Prayer amended vide Order dated 02.02.2026 made in WMP.No.3904 of

2025 in W.P.No.1955 of 2025 by VLNJ)

For Petitioner : Ms.M.Saraswathi For Respondents : Mr.L.S.M.Hasan Fizal Addl.Govt.Pleader – R1 to R3 Mr.Prabu Saravanan for Mr.P.Vijaya Devi Govt.Advocate – R4

ORDER

The petitioner is the owner of the property bearing Plot No.25, Sakthi Nagar measuring an extent of 1800 sq.ft. He had purchased the same from one, Mr.G.Vedachalam by way of a registered document in Doc.No.2990/2025 dated 25.02.2025. He applied for regularisation of the unapproved plot by way of an application dated 05.08.2025, referring to G.O.Ms.Nos.78, Housing and Urban Development Department dated 04.05.2017. The same was rejected. The ground of rejection was that the petitioner had purchased the property after the cut off date fixed under the said G.O. dated 20.10.2016. Challenging the same, the present writ petition is before this Court.

2. While going through the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition, it become clear that even before the application was filed by the petitioner seeking regularisation of plots, his vendors had moved a similar application seeking regularisation of the same and it was alleged to be pending.

3. The petitioner, being a purchaser from the previous owners, would certainly have the right to pursue the application filed by his vendors seeking regularisation . Hence, I called upon Mr.LSM.Hasan Fizal to report as to the fate of the application filed by the petitioner’s vendors.

4. When the matter came up for hearing on 29.01.2026, Mr.L.S.M.Hasan Fizal reported that the application filed by his vendors had been rejected on 24.04.2024 . Mr.M.L.Ramesh pleaded that the said order was not communicated to him. Immediately, Mr.L.S.M.Hasan Fizal served a copy of the order dated 24.04.2024. At that stage, Mr.M.L.Ramesh sought leave of this Court to amend the prayer challenging the order dated 24.04.2024. Leave was granted and the amendment application was ordered.

5. I heard Mr.M.L.Ramesh, for the petitioner and Mr.L.S.M.Hasan Fizal, learned Additional Government Pleader for contesting respondents.

6. Mr.M.L.Ramesh pointed out that the property to an extent of 2.60 cents originally belonged to one Subbaraya Mudaliar. The said Subbaraya Mudaliar had formed an unapproved layout on 18.07.2006 . He had also executed a Gift Deed for transfer of the roads and areas reserved for common amenities in favour of Venmanampudur village panchayat by way of a registered document in Doc.No.7733/2006.

7. After Subbaraya Mudaliar passed away, his legal heirs partitioned his properties. The partition covered several immovable properties including the housing layouts called Sakthi Nagar, Selvavinayagar Nagar, Saravana Nagar, Balaji Nagar, Lakshmi Nagar, Kalaivani Nagar and Subburayan Nagar Annexe. In terms of the Partition Deed entered into Doc.No.16015/2007, this plot fell to the share of Mr.S.Ganavadivel,