Disposed

M.Javid Tamiz v. The Commissioner

Madras HC22 Sept 2023WP/34648/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this writ petition filed under Article 226, the petitioners sought enforcement of an undertaking to remove unauthorized construction. The court directed the respondents to take enforcement action within eight weeks after the tenant vacated the premises.

What did the court decide?

Direction to respondents to take further enforcement action within eight weeks from the date of receipt of the order.

M.Javid Tamiz Vs The Commissioner — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2023)

¶1

W.P.No.34648 of 2019

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED: 22.09.2023

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE Mrs. JUSTICE J.NISHA BANU

¶6

AND THE HONOURABLE Mrs.JUSTICE N.MALA

¶7

W.P.No.34648 of 2019

¶8

M.Javid Tamiz S/o Late Mosal Kalim

¶9

.... Petitioner

¶10

¶11

The Commissioner,

¶12

Corporation of Chennai,

¶13

Rippon Building,

¶14

Park Town,

¶15

Chennai - 600 003.

¶16

The Executive Engineer,

¶17

Zone-5,

¶18

Sowcarpet,

¶19

Chennai - 600 079.

¶20

Jaffer Khan

¶21

S/o Rahimuddin Khan

¶22

...Respondents

¶23

Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India

¶24

to issue a Writ of Mandamus to enforce the undertaking given by the respondent Nos.1 and 2 in the earlier W.P.No.16356/2018 dated 30.01.2019 Page 1/4

¶25

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶26

W.P.No.34648 of 2019

¶27

by removing the unauthorized construction made in Plot No.7, Door No.7, Meera Labbai Street, Mannadi, George Town, Chennai - 1 with the Survey No.2735/5456 in George town Village forthwith.

¶28

For Petitioner : Mr.V.Manohar

¶29

For Respondents : Mr.E.C.Ramesh, Standing Counsel for Corporation/R1 & R2 Mr.S.Udayakumar for R3

¶30

ORDER

¶31

(Order of the Court was made by J.NISHA BANU, J.,)

¶32

This Writ Petition has been filed to issue a Writ of Mandamus to

¶33

enforce the undertaking given by the respondent Nos.1 and 2 in the earlier W.P.No.16356/2018 dated 30.01.2019 by removing the unauthorized construction made in Plot No.7, Door No.7, Meera Labbai Street, Mannadi, George Town, Chennai - 1 with the Survey No.2735/5456 in George Town Village forthwith.

¶34

When the matter is taken up for hearing, the learned counsel appearing for the 3rd respondent/tenant would state that the 3rd respondent/tenant had already vacated the premises. Photographs have also been produced before this Court which shows that the building(both ground

¶35

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶36

Page 2/4

¶37

W.P.No.34648 of 2019

¶38

floor and the first floor) is under lock and seal.

¶39

Recording the above submission, the respondents 1 and 2 are directed to take further enforcement action in accordance with law within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Accordingly, the Writ Petition stands closed. No costs.

¶40

(J.N.B., J.) (N.M., J.) 22.09.2023

¶41

vsi Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes / No Neutral citation : Yes / No

¶42

¶43

The Commissioner, Corporation of Chennai, Rippon Building, Park Town, Chennai - 600 003.

¶44

The Executive Engineer, Zone-5, Sowcarpet, Chennai - 600 079.

¶45

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶46

Page 3/4

¶47

W.P.No.34648 of 2019

¶48

J. NISHA BANU, J. and N.MALA, J.

¶49

vsi

¶50

W.P.No.34648 of 2019

¶51

22.09.2023

¶52

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶53

Page 4/4

M.Javid Tamiz v. The Commissioner

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M.Javid Tamiz v. The Commissioner

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

The Madras Pinjrapole Vs The Commissioner

S.P.Dakshinamoorthy Vs The Commissioner

K.M. Senthil Kumar Vs K. Ramamoorthy

N.R.Mahizhan Vs the District Collector and Chairman

P.I.Ashokaraamasekar Vs The Chairman-Cum-District Magistrate

S.Sutha Vs the Tamil Nadu State Level Scrutiny Committee