- Court
- High Court of Madras
- Decided
- 19 August 2026
- Bench
- Hemant Chandangoudar
- Case no.
- WP 37293/2025
Follow Madras High CourtFollow Hemant Chandangoudar
Judgment
ORDER The petitioner has approached this Court seeking a direction to the first respondent to consider the representation dated 08.09.2025.
¶2In the said representation, the petitioner states that he is the Dharmakartha of two temples, namely, Iyanar Temple and Mariamman Temple. It is further stated that there is vacant Government land near the temples, which has been used by the villagers for conducting temple festivals and other temple-related activities. According to the petitioner, the fifth respondent has commenced construction of a building on the said Government land situated opposite the two temples in Survey Nos.263/6 and 263/1.
3.Heard both sides and perused the materials available on record Page3 of 5
¶4Respondents 4 and 5 have filed a petition seeking to vacate the order of status quo granted by this Court. In the affidavit filed in support of the said petition, it is stated in paragraph 14 that construction of the Panchayat office building was sanctioned under the AGAMT Scheme for the year 2025–2026, which is a Central Government Scheme, for the official use of the Panchayat. It is further stated that the building is being constructed on lands comprised in Survey Nos.263/5 and 261/5.
¶5Admittedly, the aforesaid lands are classified as Government poramboke lands. Therefore, the petitioner cannot object to the construction of the Panchayat office building merely on the ground that the lands are being used by the temples for various purposes.
¶6In the absence of any material to show that the construction violates any law or infringes any statutory or legal right of the petitioner, the petitioner has no enforceable right to object to the construction of the building.
¶7Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed as not maintainable. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petitions are closed. There shall be no order as to costs. 19-08-2026 Index: Yes/No ak Page4 of 5 To
¶1The District Collector Villupuroam District, Villupuram.
¶2The Hindu Religious And Chartiable Endowments Villupuroam District, Villupuram
¶3The Project Manager District Rural Development Agency, Villupuram District, Villupuram
¶4The Block Development Officer Mugaiyur Block Development Office, Manampoondi, Villupuram District, Villupuram. WPoNo.o37293oofo2025 HEMANToCHANDANGOUDAR,oJ. AK WPoNo.o37293oofo2025 19-08-2026 Page5oofo5
Case details
Parties and counsel
Page1 of 5 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 19-08-2026 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR And WMP.No. 41734 of 2025 Chandrasekaran ..Petitioner(s) Vs 1. District Collector Villupuroam District, Villupuram 2. The Hindu Religious And Chartiable Endowments Villupuroam District, Villupuram 3. The Project Manager District Rural Development Agency, Villupuram District, Villupuram 4. The Block Development Officer Mugaiyur Block Development Office, Manampoondi, Villupuram District, Villupuram. 5. Louis (Panchayath President) Office Of The Panchayath Office, Mugaiyur Village, Kandachipuram Taluk, Villupuram District. 6. Kannan (Contractor) ..Respondent(s) Page2 of 5 Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India, praying for issuance of writ of mandamus, directing the 1st respondent to complete the enquiry based on the petitioner representation dated 08.09.2025 within a suitable time prescribed time fixed by this Court. For Petitioner(s): Mr.K.Rahul For Respondent(s): Mr. R.Nandhakumar, AGP – R1 & R2 Mr.Veerabathran Prasanth. M, GA- R3 Mr.E.Vijay Anand – R4 & R5
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.