A writ petition sought a mandamus directing the Pollachi Municipality Commissioner to consider a representation demanding action against unauthorised demolition of the petitioner's building. Finding no statutory provision empowering the Commissioner to act against the demolisher, the Court dismissed the petition.
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.
W.P.No.8057 of 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 27.03.2024
CORAM :
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.S. SUNDAR
AND
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N. SENTHILKUMAR
W.P.No.8057 of 2024
N.Anwar Hussain Represented by his Power Agent N.Anwar Sadath
... Petitioner
Vs.
2.N.Saaliheen ... Respondents
Prayer : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus to direct the respondent herein to consider the representation of the petitioner dated 12.01.2022 and consequently, to direct the 1st respondent to take action against the 2nd respondent herein for the unauthorised demolition committed by him in T.S.No.468/3A1C 47 in Pollachi Town to an building extent of 3000 sq.ft.
Page 1
W.P.No.8057 of 2024
For Petitioner : Mr.S.Haja Mohideen Gisthi For R1 : Mr.B.Anand Standing Counsel
O R D E R
(Order of the Court was made by S.S. SUNDAR, J. )
This writ petition is filed for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus to direct
the 1st respondent to consider the petitioner's representation, dated 12.01.2022, and consequently, to direct the 1st respondent to take action against the 2nd respondent for the unauthorised demolition of the petitioner's building.
2.The petitioner has come forward with this writ petition making serious allegations against the 2nd respondent, who according to the petitioner, had pulled down the building put up by the petitioner and caused severe damage. The petitioner himself admits that he has filed a Civil Suit and this Court, from the affidavit filed in support of this petition, is unable
Page 2
W.P.No.8057 of 2024
to know whether the suit is in relation to the property which is demolished
or in relation to a different property. Assuming that the suit is in relation to a different property, the question is whether the 1st respondent is under any legal obligation or competence to consider the representation which is only to take action against the 2nd respondent, who according to the petitioner, had unlawfully demolished the petitioner's building. This Court finds no statutory provision that would enable the 1st respondent to take action against the 2nd respondent for the allegations the petitioner has made against the 2nd respondent. It is under such circumstances, in the absence of any statutory provision for the 1st respondent to consider the representation, this Court finds that this writ petition is devoid of merits.
3.Therefore, this writ petition is dismissed. No costs.
(S.S.S.R., J.) (N.S., J.) 27.03.2024
mkn
Internet : Yes Index : Yes / No Neutral Citation : Yes / No
Page 3
W.P.No.8057 of 2024
S.S. SUNDAR, J. and N. SENTHILKUMAR, J.
mkn
To
The Commissioner, Pollachi Municipality, Pollachi.
W.P.No.8057 of 2024
Page 4
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the Commissioner is under any statutory obligation or competence to act on a representation seeking action against an unauthorised demolition.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
N.Anwar Hussain (Represented by his Power Agent N.Anwar Sadath)
The Commissioner, Pollachi Municipality, Pollachi
N.Saaliheen
S.S. Sundar
N. Senthilkumar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
