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) 41338

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
S. M. Subramaniam, K. Surender, JJ
Hyder Ali – Appellant
Versus
Commissioner Corporation Of Chennai – Respondent
WP No. 36997 of 2025



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: R.Sathiyamoorthy
For the Respondents: A.Arun Babu Standing Counsel for R1, R3 & R4, M.Babu Muthu Meeran Addl.P.P. for R2 & R5

State must protect livelihood of long-term homeless street occupiers by identifying eligible persons and providing alternate accommodation under schemes before systematic removal of encroachments.

Headnote:(A) Constitution of India - Right to livelihood - Homeless persons occupying streets for prolonged periods - Duty of State to protect livelihood by providing alternate accommodation under government schemes before removing encroachments - Distinction between eligible poor and ineligible persons.

(B) Municipal authorities - Enumeration list preparation - Coordination with housing board and revenue authorities - Removal of huts after allotment or if found ineligible following prescribed procedures.

Facts of the case:
A writ petition was filed seeking directions for eviction of illegal occupations from streets to prevent obstructions. Inspection revealed 38 families residing in huts for over 40 years with movables already removed.

Findings of Court:
Authorities directed to identify eligible persons for schemes and provide alternate accommodation. Ineligible persons to be removed without delay by following due procedures. Entire exercise to be completed expeditiously.

Issues: The issues framed concerned balancing removal of street encroachments causing obstructions with constitutional protection for long-term homeless residents through proper identification and relocation.

Ratio Decidendi: State has mandated constitutional duty to safeguard livelihood of homeless poor via tenement allotment prior to eviction ensuring systematic distinction of eligible and ineligible occupiers (Paras 3, 4 and 5). Result : Writ petition disposed of with directions.

Table of Content
1. facts of street encroachment by 38 hut dwellers (Para 1 , 2)
2. counsel submissions on enumeration for alternate housing (Para 3)
3. constitutional duty to protect long-term homeless encroachers (Para 4)
4. directions for alternate accommodation then eviction (Para 5)

(Order of the Court was made by S.M.Subramaniam J.)

Writ of Mandamus has been instituted to direct the respondents to evict the illegal encroachment at Angappa Naicken Street, Chennai-1.

2. The Assistant Commissioner, Greater Chennai Corporation, conducted inspection and identified 38 hut dwellers encroached the streets. They have put up some small huts as well as movables. The Corporation officials have already removed the movables. As far as the huts are concerned, 38 families are residing and they are to be relocated suitably by providing alternate accommodation.

3. Learned Standing Counsel for the Corporation would submit that these hut dwellers are residing by occupying the street areas for the past more than 40 years. Thus, eligible homeless poor encroachers are to be identified and an enumeration list is to be prepared and to be communicated to the Tamil Nadu Urban Habitat Development Board for providing tenement to the homeless poor people and thereafter, the huts illegally constructed will be removed and the streets will be maintained properly.

4. No doubt, street encroachers are causing obstructions for the road users and all such encroachments are to be removed in a systematic manner. However, if any homeless people are in occupation of such streets and in the present case for about 40 years, then it is the duty mandated on the State under the Constitution to protect their livelihood. In this regard, the Corporation, in co-ordination with the revenue authorities and police Department has to prepare enumeration list of eligible families and send a list to the Tamilnadu Urban Habit Development Board for allotment of alternate accommodations in any of the projects available under the Government schemes. Once, the tenements are allotted or if any encroacher is found ineligible to avail the tenement, then, the encroachments are to be removed by the competent authorities.

5. In view of the above factual position, the official respondents are directed to take immediate steps to identify the eligible encroachers to avail the Government schemes and provide alternate accommodation and remove them from the road encroachments. If any ineligible persons are encroachers, then those encroachers are to be removed without any further reference and by following the procedures as contemplated under the relevant provisions of the Act and Rules. The said exercise is directed to be completed as expeditiously as possible.

6. With the above directions, the Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs.

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