The High Court dismissed petitions seeking a writ of certiorari and quashing of notices regarding demolition and occupation. The Court rejected the prayer for restraint against pending regularization applications, noting prior unsuccessful endeavors and stating the review remedy was illusory.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 12.01.2017
CORAM :
The Hon'ble MR.SANJAY KISHAN KAUL, CHIEF JUSTICE
AND
The Hon'ble MR.JUSTICE M.SUNDAR
W.P. No.3927 of 2013
and M.P.No.1 of 2013
1.D.Rajappa 2.R.Jayalakshmi .. Petitioners -vs-
1.State of Tamil Nadu, Rep. by Secretary to Government, Housing & Urban Development Dept., Fort St. George, Chennai 600 009.
2.The Member Secretary, Chennai Metropolitan Development Authority, ''Thalamuthu Natarjan Building'', No.1, Gandhi-Irwin Road, Egmore, Chennai 600 006.
4.B.Dalayan
(R-4 impleaded as per order dt. 12.04.2016 in MP.2/2013)
5.K.Alagar Perumal (R-5 impleaded as per order dt. 12.01.2017 in WMP.17151/2016) .. Respondents
Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issue of Writ of Certiorari to call for the records relating to the demolition notice No.258 of 2012.A3 dated 29.01.2013 issued by the 3rd respondent and locking and sealing and de-occupation notice issued in Letter No.EN3/33859/2004 dated 01.02.2013 issued by the 2nd respondent and quash the same.
For Petitioners : Mr.R.Ananda Kumar For Respondents : Mr.T.N.Rajagopalan Spl.G.P. For R-1 : Mr.C.Johnson for R-2 : Mr.P.S.Sivashanmugasundaram for R-3 : Mr.B.Natarajan for R-4 * * * * *
O R D E R
(Order of the Court was made by The Hon'ble Chief Justice)
The endeavour of the petitioner to seek regularisation has on earlier occasions proved to be unsuccessful right till the Hon'ble Supreme Court. The petitioners have sought the remedy of a review under Section 113-C now, but then this Court had already held that the said remedy is an illusionary in view of the absence of rules and regulations (vide order in W.P.No.35514 of 2016 (S.Edison vs. Secretary to Government, Housing and Urban Development Department and others) decided on 07.10.2016).
2.The prayer only being a restraint against taking action in respect of the aforesaid application pending, we find no merit in the petitions.
Writ petitions, accordingly, stand dismissed. No costs. Consequently, M.P.No.1 of 2013 also stands dismissed.
Sd/Asst.Registrar (CO) /true copy/ Sub Asst. Registrar To
Housing & Urban Development Dept., Fort St. George, Chennai 600 009.
Chennai Metropolitan Development Authority, ''Thalamuthu Natarjan Building'', No.1, Gandhi-Irwin Road, Egmore, Chennai 600 006.
Naravarikuppam Town Panchayat,Redhills, Chennai 600 052. +1 cc to mr.C.Johnson,advocate,sr.3296. rj(co) krd 17/2 W.P.No.3927 of 2013
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the petitioners are entitled to a review remedy under Section 113-C given prior findings on the absence of rules.
Whether the High Court can provide relief restraining action on pending regularization applications when earlier attempts failed.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
S. Edison vs. Secretary to Government, Housing and Urban Development DepartmentReferred¶21
W.P.No.35514 of 2016 (S.Edison vs. Secretary to Government, Housing and Urban Development Department and others)
1.D.Rajappa 2.R.Jayalakshmi
1.State of Tamil Nadu, Rep. by Secretary to Government, Housing & Urban Development Dept.
The Member Secretary, Chennai Metropolitan Development Authority
The Executive Officer, Naravarikuppam Town Panchayat
4.B.Dalayan
5.K.Alagar Perumal
SANJAY KISHAN KAUL
M.SUNDAR
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
