Dismissed¶25

T.Chakravarthi, v. The State Government

Madras HC10 Mar 2025WP/19400/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Madras High Court, W.P.No.19400 of 2018, decided 10.03.2025 by Justice N.Anand Venkatesh. Mandamus petition under Article 226 seeking restraint on reclamation/construction by Tamil Nadu Housing Board in Survey No.350/11/A and B Part, Shollinganallur Taluk, Kanchipuram District. Dismissed: property taken over and award fixed in 1993; scheme laid for Sewage Treatment Plan; no costs; connected W.M.P.No.22815 of 2018 closed.

What did the court decide?

In the light of the developments placed before the Court (property taken over, award fixed in 1993, and scheme laid for putting up the Sewage Treatment Plan), the relief sought for by the petitioner cannot be granted. ¶22

T.Chakravarthi, Vs The State Government — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2025)

¶1

W.P.No.19400 of 2018

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED : 10.03.2025

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.ANAND VENKATESH

¶6

W.P.No.19400 of 2018 and W.M.P.No.22815 of 2018

T.Chakravarthi

.. Petitioner

Vs.

1.The State Government, Represented by its Secretary to Govt., Housing & Urban Development Dept., Fort St. George, Chennai – 600 009.

¶11

2.The Tamil Nadu Housing Board, Represented by its Managing Director, Nandanam, Chennai – 600 035.

¶12

3.The District Collector, Collectorate Kanchipuram, Kanchipuram District. .. Respondents

¶13

Prayer : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the 2^nd respondent not to initiate further reclamation proceeding or construction of the building in specified area comprised in Survey No.350/11/A Part and 350/11/B Part in Shollinganallur Taluk, Kanchipuram District.

¶14

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 1/4

¶15

W.P.No.19400 of 2018

¶16

For Petitioner : Mr.G.Ranganathan For Respondents : Mr.A.M.Ravindranath Jeyapal Standing Counsel

¶17

O R D E R

¶18

This writ petition has been filed for the issue of writ of mandamus

¶19

directing the 2^nd respondent not to initiate any further reclamation

¶20

proceeding or construction of any building in the subject property.

¶21

2.When the matter was taken up for hearing today, the learned Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of the Housing Board submitted that the property has already been taken over and the award has also been fixed as early as in the year 1993. The learned Standing Counsel further submitted that a scheme has already been laid for putting up the Sewage Treatment Plan.

¶22

3.In the light of the above development, the relief sought for by the petitioner cannot be granted by this Court.

¶23

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 2/4

¶24

W.P.No.19400 of 2018

¶25