B.Parimala v. The Commissioner

O R D E R (Order of the Court was made by S.M.SUBRAMANIAM,J.,) The Writ on hand has been instituted to direct the 2nd respondent to consider the representation submitted by the writ petitioner on 25.06.2022.

¶2As per the order dated 05.12.2025 the District Revenue Officer, Zone-X, Greater Chennai Corporation is present before this Court and filed a status report.

¶3The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner would mainly contend that the 5th respondent, who is the practising lawyer had let out the subject property for bachelors, which is causing nuisance to the neighbours. That apart, he has encroached upon the public road by putting up constructions.

¶4The Zonal officer, Greater Chennai Corporation has conducted field inspection and filed a report and the relevant paragraphs of the report are extracted hereunder:- "12. It is pertinent to point out that originally the land in question at Block No.14, T.S.No.148/1 of Saligramam Village is private patta land and as per the judgment and decree dated 30.10.2002 passed in A.S.No.78 of 1987 the land in question was declared as a part of the Anantharamakrishnan Street and the width of the said street is fixed as 17 feet.

¶13I respectfully submit that the land in question at Block No.14, T.S.No.148/1 of Saligramam Village was inspected by this respondent along with the Special Tahsildar and the Deputy Collector of Land and Estate Department, Greater Chennai Corporation, Central Region and on inspection it was found that the petitioner herein has encroached 3.5 feet in the said street to an extent of 52.75 sq.ft. and the 5th respondent is having aerial projection of the G.I. sheet to an extent of 1.5 feet in the said street and no encroachment was made in the road portion.

¶14I respectfully submit that the land in question at Block No.14, T.S.No.148/1 of Saligramam Village was declared as part of the road as per the judgment and decree passed in A.S.No.78 of 1987, since Revenue Authorities are not parties to the above said proceedings they were unable to point out the encroachments made therein. Further the Greater Chennai Corporation will adhere to the orders passed by this Hon'ble Court. "

¶5Since the Corporation officials found that there is no encroachments, any direction to consider the representation would not serve the cause of justice. If at all any nuisance is caused to the neighbours including the petitioner, he is at liberty to initiate appropriate action against the 5th respondent in the manner known to law.

¶6With the above observation, this Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs. (S.M.S,J.,) (C.K,J.,)

10.12.2025 Index: Yes / No Internet: Yes / No dsa To:

1.The Commissioner, Greater Chennai Corporation, Ripon Buildings, Park Town, Chennai – 600 003.

2.The Tahsildar, Mambalam Taluk, No.1/2, Bharathi Dasan Road, K.K.Nagar, Chennai – 600 078.

3.The Zonal Officer -10, South Chennai Region, Greater Chennai Corporation, Ambedkar Road, Kodambakkam, Chennai – 600 024.

4.The Assistant Engineer, Ward – 129, Greater Chennai Corporation, Arunachalam Road, Saligramam, Chennai – 600 093.

S.M.SUBRAMANIAM, J. AND

C.KUMARAPPAN, J. dsa

10.12.2025

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 10.12.2025 C O R A M THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM AND THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN W.P.No. 33515 of 202 B.Parimala ... Petitioner -vs- 1.The Commissioner, Greater Chennai Corporation, Ripon Buildings, Park Town, Chennai – 600 003. 2.The Tahsildar, Mambalam Taluk, No.1/2, Bharathi Dasan Road, K.K.Nagar, Chennai – 600 078. 3.The Zonal Officer -10, South Chennai Region, Greater Chennai Corporation, Ambedkar Road, Kodambakkam, Chennai – 600 024. 4.The Assistant Engineer, Ward – 129, Greater Chennai Corporation, Arunachalam Road, Saligramam, Chennai – 600 093. 5.Lakshmi Narayanan ... Respondents Prayer: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the 2nd respondent herein to consider the petitioner representation dated 25.06.2022 and pass necessary orders for removal of encroachment in 'Anantharamakrishnan Street'. For Petitioner : Mr.S.Namasivayam For Respondents : Mr.T.Arun Kumar, Addl. Govt. Pleader for R2 Mr.A.Arun Babu, Standing Counsel for R1, 3 & 4 Mr.D.J.Adinarayanan for R5 *****