N.Shanmugham v. The Government of Tamilnadu

2026:MHC:1171 Page1 of 11 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 18-03-2026 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S. M. SUBRAMANIAM AND THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE K. SURENDER WP No. 17421 of 2021 & WP No. 4582 of 2021 and WMP Nos. 18485 & 18486 of 2021,WMP Nos. 5206 & 5207 of 2021 N.Shanmugham S/o.K.Narayanasamy, No.2, NSK street, Kalaivanar Nagar, Padi, Chennai-50 ..Petitioner(s) Vs

¶1The Government of TamilNadu Rep by Secretary to Government, Revenue Department, Fort St.George, Chennai-9

¶2Commissioner of Land Administration Chepauk, Ezhilagam, Chennai-5

¶3The District Collector, Chennai District, Rajaji Salai, Chennai-1

¶4The Chennai Metropolitan Development Authority Rep by its member secretary, Talamuthu Natarajan Building, No.1, Gandhi irwin Road, Egmore,chennai-8

¶5CMDA Chief Planning Approval Officer Talamuthu Natarajan Building, No.1, Gandhi Irwin Road, Egmore, chennai-8

¶6Revenue Divisional officer Ambattur Division, Thirumangalam Vavin Road, Chennai-600101

¶7The Tahsildar Ambattur Taluk, Ambattur, Chennai-53 Page2 of 11

¶8The Tamilnadu Housing Board, Rep by its Managing Director, Anna salai, chennai-35

¶9The Executive Engineer and Administrative officer The TamilNadu Housing Board, Anna Nagar, Kottam, Thirumangalam,chennai-600 101

10.The District Registrar Central Chennai, Office of the District Registrar, Chennai Central, Chennai -18

11.The Sub Registrar-Villivakkam Office of the Sub Registrar, Nolambur, chennai ..Respondent(s) WP No. 4582 of 2021 N.Shanmugham S/o. K. Narayansasamy, No.2, NSK Street, Kalaivanar Nagar, Padi, Chennai 50 ..Petitioner(s) Vs

¶1The Government of Tamil Nadu Rep by Additional Chief Secretary to Government, Revenue and Disaster Management Department, Land Disposal Wing (LD5(2) Section, Fort. St.George, Chennai 9

¶2The District Collector Chennai District, Rajaji Salai, Chennai 1

¶3The Tamil Nadu Housing Board Rep by its Managing Director, Anna Salai, Chennai 35 ..Respondent(s) To call for the records of the 9th respondent in proceedings dated

26.3.2021 and made in letter No.A.Na.Ko / Survey / 1727 / 2019 and quash the same and consequently direct the respondents 1 to 3 to handover the Natham Land in S.No. 253/ 14, Padi Pudu Nagar, Padi village, Ambattur Taluk, Chennai District to Greater chennai corproation for utilizing the said Page3 of 11 land for public purpose and protect the same from being encroached by the 8th respondent WP No. 4582 of 2021 To call for records of the 1st respondent dated 1/2/2021 and made in G.O. Ms.No. 105 and quash the same and consequently directing the respondents to maintain and preserve water bodies in S.F. No. 53/2, 108/2B, 120/4, 121/2, 161/2, 253/1, 253/4, 253/5, 253/6, 253/8, 253/9, 253/10, 253/12, 253/15, 253/16, 253/3, 253/13, 253/11, 273/2, 274/3, in Padi Village, Ambattur Taluk, Chennai District as water bodies For Petitioner(s): Mr.N.A.Nassir Hussain For Respondent(s): Mr.A.Selvendran, Spl.G.P. for R1 and R2 , Mr.P.S.Raman, Advocate General assisted by Mr.D.Veerasekaran, Standing Counsel SC TNHB for R8 and R9 , Dr.S.Suriya for R3, R6, R7, R10 & R11 , Ms.S.Mridhula Royan, Standing Counsel for CMDA for R4 & R5 WP No. 4582 of 2021 For Petitioner(s): Mr.N.A.Nassir Hussain For Respondent(s): Mr.T.Arun Kumar, Addl.G.P. for R1 and R2 , Mr.P.S.Raman, Advocate General assisted by Mr.D.Veerasekaran, Standing Counsel SC TNHB for R3 Page4 of 11 COMMON ORDER (Order of the Court was made by S.M.Subramaniam J.) W.P.No.4582 of 2021 has been instituted challenging the Government Order issued in G.O.Ms.No.105, Revenue and Disaster Management Department dated 01.02.2021. W.P.No.17421 of 2021 has been instituted challenging the proceedings dated 26.02.2021.

¶2The main contention raised by the petitioner is that portion of the water bodies classified as Eri Vaikal, Erikarai, Padi Eri, Eri Ulvai in Padi Village of Ambattur Taluk, Chennai District, has been allotted in favour of the Tamil Nadu Housing Board and therefore, the Government Order is in violation of the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court and this Court, since the water body cannot be allowed for developing the residential flats/plots by the Tamilnadu Housing Board. Particularly, in S.No.253, water bodies are situated and the Government allotted the said water bodies in favour of the Tamilnadu Housing Board and thus, the petitioner, being the activist, filed the present writ petitions.

¶3Mr.N.A.Nassir Hussain, learned counsel for the petitioner would reiterate that the subject property situate in Chennai City and in the event of conversion of water body as residential flats/plots, it will lead to disaster, consequences during rainy season. Thus, the present writ petitions are to be considered. Page5 of 11

¶4Mr.P.S.Raman, learned Advocate General appearing on behalf of the State would oppose by stating that projects were developed by the Housing Board in the year 1994 in the subject property. Roads, canals are provided as it is and no projects are developed by the Housing Board in respect of canals earmarked. Even in future, the Housing Board has no proposal to construct any building in the entire subject location. Therefore, the projects which were constructed in the year 1994 and earlier, need not be disturbed now.

¶5The Government allotted the subject property in favour of Tamilnadu Housing Board initially in G.O.Ms.No.2318 dated 15.12.1979. Possession was taken by the Tamil Nadu Housing Board and subsequently, the Government issued G.O.Ms.No.543, Revenue Department dated 05.04.1988 and certain portion of water body was converted for construction of residential houses during the year 1979 and 1988 and the residential projects were developed by the Housing Board in the year 1994. Thus, the Government Orders and the scheme implemented remains unchallenged for several years. Only G.O.Ms.No.21 dated 01.02.2021, which is consequential order issued by the Government, at a later point of time, is under challenge in the present writ petition. In addition, the learned Advocate General relied on the status report filed by the Tamil Nadu Housing Board that the Housing Board has no proposal of any further construction in future in respect of the roads, canals, water bodies which are left during the implementation of the project during the year 1994. Page6 of 11

¶6This Court has considered the submission made between the parties to the lis.

¶7The status report filed by the Tamil Nadu Housing Board would be sufficient to understand the present status of the subject land and the status report is extracted hereunder along with the map enclosed with the status report. "1. I humbly submit that the Government directs that the padi tank situated in R.S.No.253 in Padi Village of Saidapet Taluk, Chengalpattu distrit be abandoned as in irrigation sources and the entire tank poramboke measuring an extent of 99.80 Acres be transferred to Revenue Department for alienation to the Tamil Nadu Housing Board and the Tamil Nadu Housing Board was permitted to enter upon the lands for the purpose of carrying out development works as per the G.O.(Ms)No.2318 PWD dated 15.12.1979.

¶2I humbly submit that, in pursuance to abandonment of the Lake, Government in its letter dated 07.01.1980 called for a proposal from District Revenue Officer, Chengalpet to change the classification of the land and transfer the right of ownership to Tamil Nadu Housing Board. In this regard the Commissioner for Land Administration in his report stated that there are large numbers of encroachments in the form of huts in the name of several areas in Padi Lake. Therefore, the said lands were sub-divided as per the G.O. (Ms.)No.543 Revenue (A1) Department dated 05.04.1988 as given below. Survey No. Sub Division No. Extent in Acres Classification

4.44 Lakeside

11.55 Kalaivanar Nagar

2.10 Road

0.78 Sewage Water Canal

16.94 Housing Board Flats

1.08 Canal

3.46 Kalaivanar Nagar

0.80 Road

2.27 Vacant

0.94 Canal

17.55 Housing Board Flats

1.47 Road Page7 of 11

2.87 Road

18.15 Pudu Nagar and Collector Nagar

5.32 Pond

6.82 Canal

3.26 Periyar Nagar, Kamaraj Nagar Gandhi Nagar Total

99.80

¶3Out of the total extent of 99.80 acres of land an extent of 63.38 acres had been handed over to the Tamil Nadu Housing Board and the extent of land utilized by the Tamil Nadu Housing Board are listed below: Survey No. Scheme Implemented-Present status Total extent in Acres handed over to TNHB Extent of the Land utilized by TNHB

Flats scheme implemented and the flats were handed over and sale deed was also executed in favour of the respective allottees

4.44

(As

per G.O.Ms.No.543, dated 05.04.1988 & G.O.Ms.No.105 dated 01.02.2021). In ground reality and as per

TSLR

in S.No.253/1,

only

0.62 acres are available. Road Land sold out to LIC of India vide Sale

deed Doc.No.2397/19

dated

17.08.1994, roads

and Channel

2.10

0.78

16.94

1.08

0.80

2.27

2.10

0.78

16.94

1.08

0.80

2.27 Canal

0.94

0.94 Radial houses constructed by TNHB and sold lout to Generall Public, Roads and Channel

17.55

1.47

17.55

1.47 Road

2.87

2.87 Encroachment regularized by TNUHDB

5.32

6.82

6.02 Total

63.38

53.08 Page8 of 11 Therefore, prays that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to accept the status report and pass such further or other orders as this Hon'ble court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case and thus render justice." Page9 of 11

¶8G.O.Ms.No.21 dated 01.02.2021 is a consequential Government Order issued and the scheme was approved by the Government by handing over the entire subject land to the Housing Board in the year 1979 and during 1988. Further , G.O. was issued converting certain portion of water body for developing residential flats. Therefore, the project implemented long before need not be disturbed at this length of time and moreover, the petitioner has challenged only the consequential order dated 01.02.2021 which cannot be construed as an initial cause of action arose, warranting interference by this Court. As soon as the Housing Board implemented the project in the year 1994, thousands of residents were occupied their respective plots or flats and constructed houses. Now, on the efflux of time, the relief as such sought for by the petitioner deserves no merit consideration. However, it is made clear that Housing Board shall not put up any further construction in respect of existing water body, public roads and common purpose area which is maintained for the benefit of the people residing in that location in accordance with the statutes and rules in force. Accordingly, the Writ Petitions stand disposed of. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed. (S.M.S.,J.) (K.S.,J.) 18-03-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order VSI Page10 of 11 To

¶1The Secretary to Government, Revenue Department, Fort St.George, Chennai-9

¶2Commissioner of Land Administration Chepauk, Ezhilagam, chennai-5

¶3The District Collector Chennai District, Rajaji Salai, Cchennai-1

¶4The Member Secretary, Chennai Metropolitan Development Authority Talamuthu Natarajan Building, No.1, Gandhi irwin Road, Egmore,chennai-8

¶5CMDA Chief Planning Approval Officer Talamuthu Natarajan Building, No.1, Gandhi Irwin Road, Egmore, chennai-8

¶6Revenue Divisional Officer Ambattur Division, Thirumangalam Vavin Road, Chennai-600101

¶7The Tahsildar Ambattur Taluk, Ambattur, Chennai-53

¶8The Managing Director, Tamilnadu Housing Board, Anna Salai, Chennai-35

¶9The Executive Engineer and Administrative Officer The TamilNadu Housing Board, Anna Nagar, Kottam, Thirumangalam,chennai-600 101

10.The District Registrar Central Chennai, office of the District Registrar, Chennai Central, Chennai -18

11.The Sub Registrar-Villivakkam Office of the Sub Registrar, Nolambur, Chennai

12.The Additional Chief Secretary to Government, Revenue and Disaster Management Department, Land Disposal Wing (LD5(2) Section, Fort. St.George, Chennai 9 WPoNo.o17421oofo2021 S.M.SUBRAMANIAMeJ. AND K.SURENDEReJ. VSI WPeNo.e17421eofe2021 and WPeNo.e4582eofe2021 18-03-2026 Page11oofo11