Malco Energy Limited Vs Tamil Nadu Power… — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2025)

Malco Energy Limited Vs Tamil Nadu Power… — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

No relief on merits; the writ petition was dismissed as withdrawn at the petitioner's request, with no costs, and the connected Writ Miscellaneous Petition (W.M.P.Crl.No.477 of 2025) was closed. Liberty was granted to the 6th respondent to approach the appropriate civil forum.

Issue for consideration

Whether respondents 4 and 5 (Superintendent of Police, Vellore District, and Sub Inspector of Police, Ariyoor Police Station) should be directed, by writ of mandamus under Article 226, to provide police protection to the petitioner to complete construction of a compound wall as per the Surveyor's report dated 06.08.2025, the Tahsildar's report dated 12.08.2025, and the petitioner's representations dated 02.09.2025 and 19.09.2023. +1 more

Ratio / Principle

Liberty is granted to the 6th respondent to approach the appropriate civil forum to seek his redressal.

Key takeaways

This Court cannot go into the rival claims of the parties in the writ petition.obiter¶30

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Madras High Court (A.D. Jagadish Chandira, J.), W.P. Crl. No. 991 of 2025, decided 15-12-2025: A charitable trust (Om Sakthi Narayani Siddhar Peedam Charitable Trust, Thirumalaikodi, Vellore) filed a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution seeking a writ of mandamus directing the Superintendent of Police, Vellore District, and the Sub Inspector of Police, Ariyoor Police Station, to provide police protection to complete construction of a compound wall as per the Surveyor's report dated 06.08.2025, the Tahsildar's report dated 12.08.2025, and the petitioner's representations dated 02.09.2025 and 19.09.2023. Counsel for the petitioner sought permission to withdraw the petition. The 6th respondent (A. Senthamarai) objected, contending that pursuant to an interim order passed by the Court the petitioner had encroached on his property and on a public road. The Court observed that it cannot go into the rival claims of the parties in a writ petition and granted the 6th respondent liberty to approach the appropriate civil forum for redressal. The writ petition stood dismissed as withdrawn, with no costs, and the connected Writ Miscellaneous Petition was closed.

W.P.Crl. No. 991 of 2025

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 15-12-2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA

W.P. Crl. No. 991 of 2025 and W.M.P.Crl.No.477 of 2025

Om Sakthi Narayani Siddhar Peedam, Charitable Trust (Regn. No.504/95), Thirumalaikodi, Vellore. Vellore District – 632 055 Rep. by its Trustee Mr.K.Soundarrajan. ...Petitioner

Vs.

1.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Vellore District.

2.The Tahsildhar Anaikattu Taluk, Vellore.

3.The Taluk Surveyor Anaikattu Taluk, Vellore District.

4.The Superintendent of Police Vellore District.

5.The Sub Inspector of Police Ariyoor Police Station, Vellore District.

6.A.Senthamarai S/o. Annamalai, Murukerai Village,

Page No.1/4

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

W.P.Crl. No. 991 of 2025

Anaikattu Taluk, Vellore District.

...Respondent(s)

PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India, praying for issuance of a writ of mandamus, directing the respondents 4 and 5 to provide police protection to the petitioner to complete the construction of compound wall as per report of the surveyor dated 06.08.2025 and the Tahsildhar's report dated 12.08.2025 and as per representation of the petitioner dated 02.09.2025 and 19.09.2023.

For Petitioner(s): Mr.V.Viswanathan For R1 to R5: Mr.K.M.D.Muhilan Additional Public Prosecutor For R6 Mr.Baalaji

ORDER

This Writ Petition has been filed to direct respondents 4 and 5 to provide police protection to the petitioner to complete the construction of a compound wall, as per the Surveyor’s report dated 06.08.2025, the Tahsildar’s report dated 12.08.2025, and the petitioner’s representations dated 02.09.2025 and 19.09.2023.

Mr.V. Viswanathan, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, seeks permission to withdraw this petition.

Per contra, Mr. Baalaji, learned counsel appearing for the 6^th respondent, would object by contending that, based on the interim order passed

Page No.2/4

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

W.P.Crl. No. 991 of 2025

by this Court, the petitioner has encroached on the property belonging to him and they have also encroached on the public road.

This Court cannot go into the rival claims of the parties in the writ

petition. However, liberty is granted to the 6^th respondent to approach the appropriate civil forum to seek his redressal.

With the above observation, this Writ Petition stands dismissed as withdrawn. No costs. Consequently, the connected Writ Miscellaneous Petition is closed.

15-12-2025

Mac

Index:Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Neutral Citation:Yes/No

To

1.The Revenue Divisional Officer Vellore

2.The Tahsildhar Anaikattu Taluk, Vellore.

3.The Taluk Surveyor Anaikattu Taluk, Vellore.

Page No.3/4

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

W.P.Crl. No. 991 of 2025

4.The Superintendent of Police Vellore.

5.The Sub Inspector of Police Ariyoor Police Station, Vellore.

A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA, J.

mac

WP. Crl. No. 991 of 2025 and W.M.P.Crl.No.477 of 2025

15.12.2025

Page No.4/4

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