Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2026 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 19366

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
N.SATHISH KUMAR, M.JOTHIRAMAN, JJ
Mahalingam – Appellant
Versus
1. The Principal Secretary to Government, Housing and Urban Development Department, Secretariate, Chennai. 2. The Principal Secretary to Government, Municipal Administration and Water Supply Department, Secretariat, Chennai. 3. The Deputy Secretary to Government, Housing and Urban Development Department, Secretariat, Chennai - 9. 4. The Member Secretary / Assistant Director, Local Planning Authority, Trichy, Kajamalai Main Road, 5. The Commissioner, Tiruchirappalli City Corporation, Tiruchirappalli. – Respondent
W.P.(MD)No.4319 of 2026

Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Mr.B.Prasanna Vinoth
For the Respondents: Mr.D.Sasikumar (R1 to R4), Additional Government Pleader Mr.J.Sri Prasad for M/s.R.B.Law Associates

Court affirms the necessity for timely disposal of appeals concerning administrative decisions affecting property rights.

Headnote:This writ petition, filed under Article 226 of the Constitution, seeks a direction for timely disposal of the appeal regarding the petitioner’s property under lock and seal. The court directs that the pending appeal is to be resolved within one month of receiving this order. Considering the delay, the appeal should be addressed promptly. The ruling indicates the commitment to expeditious judgements in administrative matters.

Table of Content
1. need for a timely disposal of property related appeals. (Para 1 , 2)
2. court's observation on the delay in consideration of appeals. (Para 3)
3. court's directive for prompt resolution of the pending appeal. (Para 4 , 5)

(Order of the Court was made by N.SATHISH KUMAR, J.)

The instant writ petition is filed seeking a direction to the respondents 1 to 3 to dispose of the appeal filed by the petitioner within the time frame fixed by this Court.

2.The contention of the petitioner is that he is the absolute owner of the property and superstructure in the subject property. Alleging certain violations, the authorities concerned passed an order of lock and seal of the subject building. Aggrieved by the said order the petitioner preferred an appeal before the authorities competed and also submitted a revised plan for regularization. However, the said appeal filed by the petitioner is still kept pending and the building remains under lock and seal. Hence, the petitioner seeks necessary direction.

3.We have considered the submissions of the petitioner and perused materials available on record.

4.Admittedly, the appeal filed by the petitioner as early as in the year 2023 is pending without consideration. Hence, the respondent competent is directed to dispose of the appeal dated 14.08.2023 within a period of one (1) month from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

5.With the above direction, this writ petition is disposed of. No costs.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document