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) 84308

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
M. Dhandapani, N. Dilip Kumar, JJ
Navaneetham – Appellant
Versus
Commissioner, Thanjavur City Municipal Corporation, Thanjavur – Respondent
W.P(MD)No.24570 of 2026



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: S. Prabha
For the Respondents: Y. Jagadeesh

The court directed municipal authorities to consider a representation regarding alleged unauthorized construction and setback violations, ensuring a fair hearing for all parties involved.

Headnote:(A) Writ of Mandamus - Administrative Action - Failure to consider representation regarding unauthorized construction - Court directs the authority to consider the representation and pass orders on merits in accordance with law. (Para 6)

Issues: Whether the respondents are bound to consider the petitioner's representation regarding unauthorized construction.

PRAYER :

Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to consider the petitioner's representation dated 08.07.2026 within a time fixed by this Hon'ble Court.

O R D E R

(Order of the Court was made by M.DHANDAPANI, J.)

This Writ Petition has been filed for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to consider the petitioner's representation dated 08.07.2026

2. Heard the learned counsel for the parties. By consent of both parties, the Writ Petition is taken up for final disposal at the stage of admission itself. Since no adverse order is going to be passed, notice to the third respondent is dispensed with.

3. Aggrieved by the construction made by the third respondent without leaving the required setback and the prescribed gap between the petitioner's house and the third respondent's property, the petitioner submitted a representation dated 08.07.2026 to the respondents seeking inspection of the property, verification of the construction with reference to the approved plan and physical measurement of the alleged unauthorised construction. Since no effective action has been taken on the said representation, the present Writ Petition has been filed.

4. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that it would suffice if this Court issues a direction to the respondents 1 and 2 to consider the petitioner's representation dated 08.07.2026 and pass appropriate orders thereon, on merits and in accordance with law, within a time frame to be fixed by this Court.

5. The learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents 1 and 2, on instructions, would submit that the authority concerned will consider the petitioner's grievance and pass appropriate orders on merits and in accordance with law.

6. Considering the above facts and circumstances of the case and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the matter, this Writ Petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondents 1 and 2 to consider the petitioner's representation dated 08.07.2026 and pass appropriate orders on merits and in accordance with law, after issuing notice to all necessary parties including the third respondent and affording them an opportunity of hearing. The entire exercise shall be completed as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 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
whatsapp-icon Back to top