R.Francis Ambrose vs The Local Bodies Ombudsman - 2026 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 35239

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2026 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 35239

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Sushrut Arvind Dharmadhikari, CJ, G.Arul Murugan, J
R.Francis Ambrose – Appellant
Versus
The Local Bodies Ombudsman – Respondent

Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners:Mr.R.Francis Ambrose (Petitioner in-Person), Mrs.Hema Sampath Senior Counsel for Ms.B.Louis Sharmila
For the Respondents:Mr.B.Nedunchezhiyan for R1, Mr.A.Edwin Prabakar State Government Pleader for RR2 4 to 6 8 and 10, Mr.C.Manoharan Standing Counsel for R7, Mr.P.Srinivas Standing Counsel for R9, Mrs.Hema Sampath Senior Counsel for Ms. B.Louis Sharmila for RR11 and 12, Mr.P.Srinivas Standing Counsel for R1, Mr.B.Nedunchezhiyan for R2, Mr.Francis Ambrose (Petitioner in-Person) for R3

Heard the petitioner/party-in-person in W.P.No.33219 of 2024 and Mrs.Hema Sampath, learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner in W.P.No.33301 of 2025.

2.W.P.No.33219 of 2024 is filed seeking to implement the order of the Tamil Nadu Local Bodies Ombudsman dated 10.05.2023 and W.P.No.33301 of 2025 is filed assailing the order of the Tamil Nadu Local Bodies Ombudsman dated 10.05.2023.

3.The petitioner-in-person had approached the Tamil Nadu Local Bodies Ombudsman complaining certain unauthorised constructions put up by the Church and also complaining inaction on the part of the authorities and to take action. By order dated 10.05.2023, the Tamil Nadu Local Bodies Ombudsman disposed of the complaint by issuing certain directions.

4.It is the grievance of the petitioner-in-person that the directions issued by the Ombudsman had not been given effect to and therefore, seeks implementation of the order. The petitioner in the other writ petition complains that the directions have been issued by the Ombudsman without making them as a party and affording an opportunity, which is not sustainable and therefore, seeks to quash the same.

5.At the outset, it is to be noted that the petitioner-in-person

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2026 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 35239

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRASSushrut Arvind Dharmadhikari, CJ, G.Arul Murugan, JR.Francis Ambrose – AppellantVersusThe Local Bodies Ombudsman – Respondent

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Sushrut Arvind Dharmadhikari, CJ, G.Arul Murugan, J
R.Francis Ambrose – Appellant
Versus
The Local Bodies Ombudsman – Respondent