Disposed

D.Sridhar v. The Managing Director

Madras HC6 Jun 2024WP/17916/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court directed the respondents, Tamil Nadu Housing Board authorities, to consider the petitioner's representations dated between 2017 and 2019 regarding the flat's cost and defects. The Board was ordered to pass appropriate orders on merits within four weeks. The writ petition was disposed of accordingly.

What did the court decide?

Direction to consider representations and pass orders on merits within four weeks.

D.Sridhar Vs The Managing Director — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2024)

¶1

W.P. No.17916 of 2021

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED: 06.06.2024

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.K. ILANTHIRAIYAN

¶6

W.P. No.17916 of 2021

D.Sridhar

.... Petitioner

vs.

The Managing Director, TamilNadu Housing Board, No.493, Anna Salai, Nandanam, Chennai-600 035.

¶11

The Executive Engineer and Administrative Officer, Besant Nagar Division, TamilNadu Housing Board, No.48, Dr.Muthulakshmi Road, Adayar, Chennai-600 020.

¶12

The Manager, Marketing and Services, TamilNadu Housing Board, No.48, Dr.Muthulakshmi Road, Adayar, Chennai-600 020. .... Respondents

¶13

Prayer : Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to consider the representations of the petitioner dated 07.08.2017, 27.09.2017, 07.12.2017, 22.02.2018, 29.03.2019, 24.04.2019 and 13.11.2019 and

¶14

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

¶15

1/4

¶16

W.P. No.17916 of 2021

¶17

direct the respondents to fix the final cost for the flat based on the actual standard of work as per property/materials value (Schedule of Rates) for the year 2011-2012, fix the defects, reduce cost for facilities not provided as CMDA/GCC approved plan and TNHB financial statement, restrain from charging interest for paying lumpsum amounts and pay compensation of Rs.10 lakhs for the mental agony and for the delay in handing over the possession, pay the depreciation value of building for the delayed period and for the petitioner's flat situated at Block No.25, Flat No.8, Agaran TNHB Apartments, VIth Street, Behind Lake View, Sholinganallur, Chennai-600 119.

¶18

For Petitioner : Mr.V.Elangovan

¶19

For Respondents : Mr.D.Veerasekaran Standing Counsel

¶20

ORDER

¶21

This writ petition has been filed for direction to direct the

¶22

respondents to consider the representations of the petitioner dated 07.08.2017, 27.09.2017, 07.12.2017, 22.02.2018, 29.03.2019, 24.04.2019 and 13.11.2019 and direct the respondents to fix the final cost for the flat based on the actual standard of work as per property/materials value (Schedule of Rates) for the year 2011-2012.

¶23

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

¶24

2/4

¶25

W.P. No.17916 of 2021

¶26

2. Without going into the merits of the main writ petition, the

¶27

respondents are directed to consider the petitioner's representation dated 07.08.2017, 27.09.2017, 07.12.2017, 22.02.2018, 29.03.2019, 24.04.2019 and 13.11.2019 respectively and pass appropriate orders on merits in accordance with law within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order.

¶28

3. With the above direction, this writ petition is disposed of. No order as to costs.

¶29

06.06.2024

¶30

Index: Yes/No Internet: Yes/No Speaking Order/Non-Speaking Order gvn

¶31

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

¶32

3/4

¶33

W.P. No.17916 of 2021

¶34

G.K. ILANTHIRAIYAN, J.

¶35

gvn

¶36

¶37

The Managing Director, TamilNadu Housing Board, No.493, Anna Salai, Nandanam, Chennai-600 035.

¶38

The Executive Engineer and Administrative Officer, Besant Nagar Division, TamilNadu Housing Board, No.48, Dr.Muthulakshmi Road, Adayar, Chennai-600 020.

¶39

The Manager, Marketing and Services, TamilNadu Housing Board, No.48, Dr.Muthulakshmi Road, Adayar, Chennai-600 020.

¶40

W.P. No.17916 of 2021

¶41

06.06.2024

¶42

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

¶43

4/4

D.Sridhar v. The Managing Director

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

D.Sridhar v. The Managing Director

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

V.Sakthivel Vs The Revenue Divisional Officer

Munisamy Vs The Inspector of police

Sittharangan Vs The District Superintendent of police

Iyyappan Vs The Chairman

Surya Vs The Executive Engineer

J.Selvakumar Vs The Tasildar