Dismissed¶25

N.Manikandan v. State by Tamil Nadu

Madras HC7 Aug 2025WP/29387/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Tamil Nadu Urban Habitat Development Board; writ of mandamus; representation dated 28.04.2025; allotment of flat Door No.22/1 Dr. Ambedkar Nagar Manali New Town Chennai; CMDA list of beneficiaries; 29 beneficiaries; petitioner not in beneficiary list; housing board allotment denied; writ petition dismissed; no costs; High Court of Judicature at Madras; Justice N. Anand Venkatesh; WP No. 29387 of 2025.

What did the court decide?

Since the subject property had been handed over to the Tamil Nadu Urban Habitat Development Board, allotment had already been made in favour of 29 beneficiaries, and the petitioner's name does not find place in the list of beneficiaries prepared by the CMDA, the Court concluded that the relief sought by the petitioner cannot be granted. ¶22

N.Manikandan Vs State by Tamil Nadu — Madras HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

¶1

WP No. 29387 of 2025

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED: 07-08-2025

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE N. ANAND VENKATESH

¶6

WP No. 29387 of 2025

¶7

N.Manikandan S/o. Nelan

¶8

Petitioner(s)

¶9

¶10

State By Tamil Nadu Urban Habitat Development Board, Rep. By Its Secretary, No.5, Kamarajar Salai, Chepauk, Chennai600 005

¶11

2.The Assistant Engineer Tamil Nadu Urban Habitat Development Board, Tondiarpet, Kottam-1, Chennai-600 081

¶12

Respondent(s)

¶13

PRAYER

¶14

Directing the 1st and 2nd Respondents to consider petitioner representation dated 28.04.2025 consequently directing the 1st and 2nd Respondents to allot the Door No.22/1 situated in Dr. Ambedkar Nagar, Manali, New town, Chennai -600 103.

¶15

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

¶16

WP No. 29387 of 2025

¶17

For Petitioner: Mr.J.Tamilselvam For Respondent: Mrs.K.Indumathy Standing Counsel for R1

¶18

ORDER

¶19

This writ petition has been filed for the issue of a writ of mandamus directing the 1st and 2nd respondents to deal with the representation made by the petitioner on 28.04.2025 and for a direction to the respondents to allot Door No.22/1 situated in Dr. Ambedkar Nagar, Manali, New town, Chennai -600 103.

¶20

Heard Mr.J.Tamilselvam, the learned counsel for the petitioner and Mrs.K.Indumathy, the learned Standing Counsel for the 1st respondent.

¶21

The learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents, on instructions, submitted that after the subject property was handed over to Tamil Nadu Urban Habitat Development Board, the allotment has been made in favour of 29 beneficiaries. The name of the petitioner does not find place in the list of beneficiaries prepared by the CMDA. Therefore, it was submitted that the petitioner cannot seek for any allotment of the flat in his favour.

¶22