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) 49519

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Hemant Chandangoudar, J
K. Selvadurai – Appellant
Versus
Commissioner, Tiruchirappalli City Corporation – Respondent
W.P.(MD)No.15558 of 2026|W.M.P.(MD)No.11661 of 2026



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: J.K. Jeyaselan
For the Respondents: K.R. Kishore Ram

A writ of mandamus is appropriate to compel statutory authorities to consider and dispose of a public representation regarding alleged unauthorized construction within a time-bound, lawful process, without the court pre-judging the merits of the underlying dispute.

Headnote:The petitioners sought a Writ of Mandamus under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to restrict construction activity over a storm water drain until their representation was adjudicated. They alleged that the third respondent had exceeded the permission granted by the municipal authorities. The Court, noting the submission of the municipal counsel that the representation would be considered on its merits, declined to rule on the substantive merits of the allegations. The main issue was whether the municipal authorities were obligated to consider the petitioners' representation regarding alleged unauthorized construction. The Court held that the authorities have a duty to process such representations in accordance with the law, ensuring all relevant parties are heard, without the immediate need for a judicial determination on the validity of the construction. The writ petition is disposed of with the direction that the authorities must consider and decide the representation within three weeks after providing a hearing to all affected parties.

Table of Content
1. petitioners seek mandamus against alleged unauthorized construction over storm water drains. (Para 1 , 2)
2. court directs municipal authorities to consider grievances via an administrative process. (Para 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7)

PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of Writ of Mandamus, to direct the 1st and 2nd Respondents to forbear the 3rd Respondent from undertaking any construction activity over the storm water drain abutting Thamarai salai east extension lanes, Annamalai Nagar, Tiruchirappalli City, until the petitioner’s representation dated 06.06.2026 is considered by the 1st and 2nd Respondents.

For Petitioners :Mr.J.K.Jeyaselan

For R1 and R2 :Mr.K.R.Kishore Ram

for M/s.K.B.Law Associates

*****

O R D E R

The petitioners are before this Court seeking issuance of a Writ of Mandamus directing respondents 1 and 2 to forbear the third respondent from carrying out any construction activity over the storm water drain abutting Thamarai Salai East Extension Lanes, Annamalai Nagar, Tiruchirappalli City, pursuant to the petitioners’ representation dated 06.06.2026.

2.According to the petitioners, respondents 1 and 2 had granted permission to the third respondent only to place a slab over the storm water drain. However, it is alleged that the third respondent, contrary to the permission granted, has commenced construction of a bridge over the drain. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioners submitted a representation dated 06.06.2026 requesting the authorities to take appropriate action. Their grievance is that no orders have been passed on the said representation.

3.Mr. K.R. Kishore Ram, learned counsel appearing for respondents 1 and 2, on instructions, submitted that no unauthorised construction has been undertaken over the storm water drain. He further submitted that the petitioners’ representation dated 06.06.2026 would be considered and disposed of by the competent authority on its own merits and in accordance with law within such time as may be stipulated by this Court. The said submission is placed on record.

4.In view of the aforesaid submission, and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the rival contentions, this Court is inclined to direct the competent authority to consider the petitioners’ representation in a time-bound manner.

5.Accordingly, the writ petition stands disposed of with a direction to respondents 1 and 2 to consider and dispose of the petitioners’ representation dated 06.06.2026 on its own merits and in accordance with law, after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioners, the third respondent and all other necessary parties.

6.The aforesaid exercise shall be completed within a period of three (3) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

7.There shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

Index :Yes / No 10.06.2026

Internet :Yes / No (1/2)

NCC :Yes / No

cmr

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