Disposed

Anandan v. The Commissioner

Madras HC22 Feb 2024WP/16226/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ petition under Article 226, the High Court held that no prior notice was issued to the petitioner for encroachment removal. The Court directed respondents to issue a statutory notice and granted liberty to submit objections before demolition could proceed.

What did the court decide?

Directed respondents to issue statutory notice and grant liberty to file objections within ten days before demolition.

Anandan Vs The Commissioner — Landlord and Tenant | Madras HC (2024)

¶1

W.P.No.16226 of 2019

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED : 22.02.2024

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM and

¶6

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.RAJASEKAR

¶7

W.P.No.16226 of 2019

¶8

and

¶9

W.M.P.Nos.15933 and 15934 of 2019

Anandan

... Petitioner

Vs.

The Commissioner, Hosur Municipality,

¶14

Hosur, Krishnagiri District.

¶15

The Assistant Engineer, Tamil Nadu Electricity Board, Hosur, Krishnagiri District. ... Respondents

¶16

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

¶17

to issue a Writ of Mandamus, forbearing the 1^st respondent from demolishing the petitioner's house bearing Plot No.19A in Survey No.1162/2018 Chennathur Village, Hosur Taluk, Krishnagiri District.

¶18

For Petitioner : Mr.A.Gouthaman

¶19

Page 1 of 4

¶20

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

¶21

W.P.No.16226 of 2019

¶22

For R1 : Mr.M.Rajamathivanan, Standing Counsel For R2 : Mr.S.Madhusudanan, Standing Counsel for TANGEDCO

¶23

O R D E R

¶24

(Order of the Court was made by S.M.SUBRAMANIAM, J. )

¶25

The Writ Petition has been filed to forbear the 1^st respondent from

¶26

demolishing the petitioner's house bearing Plot No.19A in Survey No.1162/2018 Chennathur Village, Hosur Taluk, Krishnagiri District.

¶27

The impugned notice reveals that the writ petitioner in W.P.No.7102 of 2019 has encroached upon the park area earmarked in the approved layout plan. Thus, the Commissioner, Hosur Municipality issued notice to remove encroachments failing which the Municipality will remove and recover the charges, as applicable under the provisions of the Act. As in the case of the writ petitioner in W.P.No.16226 of 2019, notice has not been issued. In such circumstances, the respondents are directed to issue notice as contemplated under the Statues. The writ petitioner is granted liberty to submit her objections, if any, within a period of ten days. On receipt of

¶28

Page 2 of 4

¶29

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

¶30

W.P.No.16226 of 2019

¶31

objections, if any, from the encroachers, orders are to be passed and thereafter, the encroachments are to be removed.

¶32

Accordingly, the Writ Petition stands disposed of. Consequently,

¶33

the connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed. No costs.

¶34

(S.M.S.,J.) (K.R.S.,J.) 22.02.2024 2/2

¶35

skr Index : Yes Speaking order

¶36

¶37

The Commissioner, Hosur Municipality, Hosur, Krishnagiri District.

¶38

The Assistant Engineer, Tamil Nadu Electricity Board, Hosur, Krishnagiri District.

¶39

Page 3 of 4

¶40

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

¶41

W.P.No.16226 of 2019

¶42

S.M.SUBRAMANIAM, J. and K.RAJASEKAR, J.

¶43

skr

¶44

W.P.No.16226 of 2019

¶45

22.02.2024

¶46

Page 4 of 4

¶47

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

Anandan v. The Commissioner

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Anandan v. The Commissioner

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

R.Velmurugan Vs Block Development Officer

A.Appavu, Vs The District Collector

L.R.C.Ravishankar Vs The District Collector

Geetha Vs The Commissioner

Poovathal Vs Ramathal

M.Dheenadayalan Vs The District Collector