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) 43922

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
S. M. Subramaniam, K. Surender, JJ
C. Sriraman – Appellant
Versus
Government of Tamil Nadu – Respondent
WP No. 13977 of 2026



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: No appearance
For the Respondents: T. Arunkumar, RA. Gopinath

A writ petition challenging a preliminary statutory notice for encroachment is premature; the aggrieved party must first submit an explanation to the authority, which is then obligated to consider such response before taking final enforcement action.

Headnote:The petitioner challenged a notice issued under Section 128(1)(b) of the Tamil Nadu Urban Local Bodies Act, 1998, regarding alleged encroachment in a water body. The Court noted that the impugned notice was pursuant to a survey conducted following a prior court direction to identify and remove encroachments. The core issue is whether a statutory notice regarding encroachment provides sufficient cause for writ intervention prior to a final determination. The Court reasoned that a show-cause notice is not a final order and does not warrant judicial interference at the nascent stage; the petitioner must file a representation. The writ petition is dismissed with liberty to the petitioner to submit an explanation to the competent authority within a stipulated timeframe.

Table of Content
1. background of statutory notice issued for encroachment based on previous judicial orders. (Para 1 , 2)
2. requirement for exhaustion of administrative remedy before invoking writ jurisdiction. (Para 3)

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

Writ petition has been instituted challenging notice under Section 128(1)

(b) of Tamil Nadu Urban Local Bodies Act (hereinafter referred to as ‘Act’).

2. Commissioner, on receipt of complaint, regarding encroachment in water body, conducted inspection. Survey was conducted pursuant to the direction issued by this Court in WP.No.33506 of 2025. On identification of encroachment in water body, impugned notice came to be issued under Section 128(1)(b) of the Act.

3.Thus, the said notice would not provide any cause for institution of writ proceedings. However, petitioner is at liberty to submit his explanation along with the documents, if any, to defend his case. On receipt of any such notice, Commissioner, Avadi shall consider the same and thereafter, take a final decision, proceed with the enforcement action, if any encroachments are identified. The said exercise is directed to be completed within a period of 12 weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

4. With the above observation, the writ petition is dismissed. No costs.

Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition, if any, are closed.

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