VoxJuris
Home › High Courts › Madras High Court 2026 › High Court of Madras

C.Nedumudikilli v. The State of Tamil Nadu

CLOSED
Court
High Court of Madras
Decided
22 June 2026
Bench
M.Dhandapaniauthor
Case no.
WP 6245/2020

Follow Madras High CourtFollow M.Dhandapani

Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 22-06-2026 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.DHANDAPANI WP Nos.6245 of 2020 and 15673 of 2022 and WMP Nos.7360 and 7362 of 2020 C.Nedumudikilli S/o.K.M.Chokan, No.22/ 26, Sanmugasundaram Street, Mutamil Nagar, Saligramam, Chennai-93. ..Petitioner in both petitions Vs

¶1The State of Tamil Nadu Rep by its Secretary to Government, Urban and housing Department, Fort.St. George, Chennai-600 009.

¶2The State of Tamil Nadu Rep by its Secretary to Government Forest Department, Fort St. George, Chennai-600 009.

¶3The District Collector Office of the Collector, Kancheepuram Collectorate, Kancheepuram District.

¶4The Secretary Chennai Metropolitan Development Authority Page1 of 8 No.1, Gandhi Irwin Road, Egmore, Chennai 600 008.

¶5The State of Tamil Nadu Rep by its Principal Chief and Conservator of Forests, Panagal Maligai, Chennai-600 015.

¶6The Forest Settlement Officer Thiruvallur High Road, Chinna Ekkadu, Jaya Nagar, Thiruvallur-602 001.

¶7The Superintendent and District Forest Officer Chengalpattu Division, Kancheepuram.

¶8The Chief Engineer PWD (WRO) CSIR Road, Tharamani, Chennai-600 113.

¶9The Joint Sub-Registrar-I Office of the Joint Sub-Registrar-I, Saidapet, Chennai-600 015. ..Respondents in both petitions PRAYER in W.P.No.6245 of 2020: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records of the 4th Respondent's impugned communication bearing Proceedings No.R1/ 11402 / 2014 dated 02.02.2016 rejecting the land use request for the Re-Classification in respect of the lands situated in Survey No.429 / 1B, 429/1A1F2 and 429/ 1A1B in Pallikaranai Village, Sholinganallur Taluk, Kancheepuram District, measuring an extent of 2.32 acres and to quash the same, consequentially direct the 4th Respondent to grant Re-Classification permission to deal with the property in accordance with law before the 9th Respondent. Page2 of 8 PRAYER in W.P.No.15673 of 2022: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records of the 4th Respondent's impugned communication bearing Proceedings No.R1/ 11402 / 2014 dated 02.02.2016 rejecting the land use request for the Re-Classification in respect of the lands situated in Survey No.429 / 1B, 429/1A1F2 and 429/ 1A1B in Pallikaranai Village, Sholinganallur Taluk Kancheepuram District, measuring an extent of 2.32 acres and to quash the same, consequentially direct the 4th Respondent to grant Re-Classification permission to deal with the property in accordance with law before the 8th Respondent. In both the writ petitions For Petitioner(s): Mr.Selvam Soundar For Respondent(s): Mr.C.Prabakaran Government Counsel for R1 to R3 and R5 to R9 Ms.P.Veena Suresh for R4 COMMON ORDER These two writ petitions have been filed challenging the impugned communication of the 4th respondent dated 02.02.2016 rejecting the land use request for the Re-Classification in respect of the lands situated in Survey No.429 / 1B, 429/1A1F2 and 429/ 1A1B situated in Pallikaranai Village, Sholinganallur Taluk Kancheepuram District, measuring an extent of 2.32 acres and to quash the same, consequentially direct the 4th Respondent to grant Re-Page3 of 8 Classification permission to deal with the property in accordance with law before the 8th and 9th Respondents.

2.The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner has purchased the land comprised in Survey No.429 / 1B, 429/1A1F2 and 429/ 1A1B situated in Pallikaranai Vilalge, Sholinganallur Taluk, Kancheepuram District, measuring an extent of 2.32 acres, under registered sale deeds dated

15.12.2004 and 16.12.2004 with the intention of developing the property. At the time of purchase, the surrounding areas had already been developed into residential layouts. Subsequently, the petitioner came to know that the subject land had been classified as "Swamp Area" in the Second Master Plan. Seeking reclassification of the land, the petitioner approached the CMDA However, the CMDA refused to reclassify the land on the ground that as per the Second Master Plan, the subject land did not have access to a road and was classified as a Swamp Area. Consequently, the CMDA declined to reclassify the land as a Residential Zone. Aggrieved by the said decision, the petitioner has filed the present writ petition.

3.However, the learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that with respect to the very same issue, the National Green Tribunal, Southern Zone, Page4 of 8 Chennai, issued directions to the Water Resources Department (WRD), Tamil Nadu State Wetland Authority (TNSWA), and Chennai Metropolitan Development Authority (CMDA), to work in coordination and expedite the preparation of the Integrated Management Plan (IMP), based on the survey of the Ramsar Site Wetland and the guidelines required for the conservation and maintenance of the Ramsar Site, while considering the grant of planning permit by concerned authorities.

4.The learned counsel would further submit that, in view of the directions issued by the National Green Tribunal, this Court may permit the petitioner to submit a fresh application after a decision is taken by the Tamil Nadu State Wetland Authority (TNSWA), and Chennai Metropolitan Development Authority (CMDA).`

5.Recording the said submission and without interfering with the order impugned, this Court grants liberty to the petitioner to submit a fresh application after the publication of the Third Master Plan by the competent authorities in accordance with the guidelines and directions issued by the National Green Tribunal. Page5 of 8

6.With the above observations and directions, these writ petitions are disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed. 22-06-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Uma To

¶1The Secretary to Government, Urban and Housing Department, Fort.St. George, Chennai-600 009.

¶2The Secretary to Government Forest Department, Fort St. George, Chennai-600 009.

¶3The District Collector Office of the Collector, Kancheepuram Collectorate, Kancheepuram District.

¶4The Secretary Chennai Metropolitan Development Authority No.1, Gandhi Irwin Road, Page6 of 8 Egmore, Chennai 600 008.

¶5The Principal Chief and Conservator of Forests, Panagal Maligai, Chennai-600 015.

¶6The Forest Settlement Officer Thiruvallur High Road, Chinna Ekkadu, Jaya Nagar, Thiruvallur-602 001.

¶7The Superintendent and District Forest Officer Chengalpattu Division, Kancheepuram.

¶8The Chief Engineer PWD (WRO) CSIR Road, Tharamani, Chennai-600 113.

¶9The Joint Sub-Registrar-I Office of the Joint Sub-Registrar-I, Saidapet, Chennai-600 015. Page7 of 8 WPoNos.6245oofo2020o&o15673oofo2022 M.DHANDAPANI,oJ. Uma WPoNos.6245oofo2020o&o15673oofo2022oand WMPoNos.7360o&o7362oofo2020 22-06-2026 Page8oofo8

Source: High Court of Madras, through the eCourts High Court services, via the Indian High Court Judgments open dataset by Dattam Labs (CC BY 4.0). Text was extracted from the official PDF and may contain conversion errors. Check the official PDF before relying on it.