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) 44299

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Hemant Chandangoudar, J
R. Venkateswaran – Appellant
Versus
Commissioner, Office of the Trichy Corporation – Respondent
Writ Petition



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: A. Mohammed Haneef
For the Respondents: J. Sriprasad

The court may grant temporary access to occupants for essential maintenance of unauthorized premises pending legal demolition to address public health and safety concerns, provided such access does not interfere with the authority's power to demolish the structure in accordance with the law.

Headnote:The case involves a petition seeking a Writ of Mandamus under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to permit residents access to a terrace area for maintenance purposes to prevent health hazards, despite the area being designated as unauthorized construction. The court acknowledges existing orders regarding unauthorized construction but weighs the immediate necessity of maintenance against the eventual demolition, concluding that temporary access for maintenance will not prejudice the respondent's powers. The main issue is whether flat owners of a building containing unauthorized portions can be granted restricted access to those portions for essential maintenance to safeguard health and safety pending legal demolition. The court held that while the respondent retains the authority to demolish unauthorized structures, public safety and health necessitate allowing the occupants to perform maintenance on the disputed terrace area until such demolition is executed. The Writ Petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondent to permit the petitioner and the other flat owners to clean and maintain the second floor and terrace area until demolition of the said unauthorized construction.

Table of Content
1. court intervention via mandamus to balance property access for maintenance against unauthorized status. (Para 1 , 2 , 3)
2. granting limited access for safety/sanitation pending enforcement action. (Para 4 , 5 , 7)

O R D E R

Heard Mr.A.Mohammed Haneef, learned counsel for the petitioner, and Mr.J.Sriprasad, learned Standing counsel for the respondent.

2.The petitioner has approached this Court seeking issuance of a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondent to permit the petitioner and the flat owners of “Mark Apartment,” located at Door No.475, Neduncheziyan Street, Ward No.38, K.K.Nagar, Thiruchirapalli District, to access the terrace for the purpose of carrying out periodic maintenance.

3. Pursuant to the order passed by the Hon’ble Division Bench of this Court, the second floor and the terrace of the said apartment complex were sealed and locked on the ground that the construction of the second floor and terrace was unauthorized. The petitioner states that due to lack of maintenance, the terrace has become dilapidated and is causing health hazards to the residents of the apartment complex.

4. Learned counsel for the respondent submitted that the Housing and Urban Development Department, vide communication dated 09.10.2019, had directed the respondent to demolish the said unauthorized construction and that the petitioner has not taken any steps to demolish the same.

5. It is submitted that the petitioner and the other residents are not occupying the unauthorized construction, but are residing only in the portions that were lawfully constructed. It is further stated that the aforesaid communication had not been served on the petitioner’s vendor. In any event, until the demolition of the unauthorized construction is carried out, no prejudice would be caused to the respondent if the petitioner and the other residents are permitted to clean and maintain the second floor and terrace area so as to protect their health and safety. 6. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondent to permit the petitioner and the other flat owners to clean and maintain the second floor and terrace area until demolition of the said unauthorized construction.

7. Liberty is reserved to the respondent to demolish the unauthorized construction in accordance with law, after issuing notice to the petitioner and the other residents/occupants of the apartment complex.

8. There shall be no order as to 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