Dismissed¶¶45

S.Ayyappan, v. the State of Tamil Nadu

Madras HC15 Dec 2025WP(MD)/14400/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Tamil Nadu Regularization of Unapproved Layouts and Plot Rules 2017; ultra vires; subordinate legislation; cut off date 20.10.2016; Section 22A Registration Act Tamil Nadu amendment; G.O.(Ms)No.78 Housing and Urban Development UD 4(3) dated 04.05.2017; writ of declaration; Article 226; writ petitions dismissed; no costs; Madurai Bench Madras High Court; G.R.Swaminathan J.; R.Kalaimathi J.; W.P(MD) Nos.14400 & 14401 of 2017.

What did the court decide?

Though the Rules are subordinate legislation, they can be assailed only on certain grounds - ultra vires the parent statute, unconstitutionality, or lack of competence of the issuing authority - and on the facts no such ground was made out. ¶¶37

S.Ayyappan, Vs the State of Tamil Nadu — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Dismissed

¶¶45

Issue for consideration

Whether the Tamil Nadu Regularization of Unapproved Layouts and Plot Rules, 2017 issued under G.O.(Ms).No. 78 dated 04.05.2017 are ultra vires and liable to be so declared. +1 more

¶¶25

Court's answer

¶¶37

Ratio / Principle

It is open to the authority issuing subordinate legislation to prescribe a cut off date, but there must be some object behind such prescription.

¶¶38

Key takeaways

Section 22A of the Registration Act, a Tamil Nadu amendment brought out in 2012, came into force only on 20.10.2016; the cut off date of 20.10.2016 was chosen to align the Rules with the statutory scheme underlying the Registration Act, and the choice cannot be termed arbitrary.ratio¶¶44
The Court found no ground to interfere with the Rules and dismissed the writ petitions.ratio¶¶45

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Writ petitions under Article 226 challenging the Tamil Nadu Regularization of Unapproved Layouts and Plot Rules, 2017 (issued in G.O.(Ms)No.78, Housing and Urban Development [UD 4(3)] Department, dated 04.05.2017) as ultra vires were dismissed. Held: subordinate legislation can be assailed only on limited grounds - ultra vires the parent statute, unconstitutionality, or want of competence in the issuing authority - and none was made out. The prime grievance, the cut off date of 20.10.2016, was upheld because Section 22A of the Registration Act (a Tamil Nadu amendment brought out in 2012) came into force only on 20.10.2016, and the date was chosen to align the Rules with the statutory scheme of the Registration Act; the choice was held not arbitrary. Writ petitions dismissed with no costs; connected miscellaneous petitions closed. Order authored by G.R.Swaminathan, J., bench comprising G.R.Swaminathan and R.Kalaimathi, JJ., Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, 15.12.2025.

¶1

W.P(MD) Nos.14400 & 14401 of 2017

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

Date : 15.12.2025

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.R.SWAMINATHAN AND THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE R.KALAIMATHI

¶6

W.P(MD) Nos.14400 & 14401 of 2017 & W.M.P.(MD)Nos.11286 & 11287 of 2017

¶7

S.Ayyappan

¶8

... Petitioner in both W.Ps.

¶9

Vs.

¶10

1.The State of Tamil Nadu,

¶11

Rep. by its Secretary to Government, Housing and Urban Development (UD 4(3)) Department, Secretariat,

¶12

Chennai.

¶13

2.The State of Tamil Nadu,

¶14

Rep. by its Principal Secretary to Government, Rural Development and Panchayat Raj Department,

¶15

Chennai.

¶16

3.The State of Tamil Nadu,

¶17

Rep. by its Secretary to Government, Registration Department, Secretariat,

¶18

Chennai.

¶19

1/6

¶20

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

¶21

W.P(MD) Nos.14400 & 14401 of 2017

¶22

4.The Inspector General of Registration, O/o the Inspector General of Registration, Santhome, Chennai.

¶23

5.The Commissioner of Town and Country Planning, Chennai-600 002.

¶24

... Respondents in both W.Ps.

¶25

COMMON PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Declaration, to call for the records relating to declare that the Tamil Nadu Regularization of Unapproved Layouts and Plot Rules, 2017 issued under G.O.(Ms).No. 78 Housing and Urban Development [UD 4(3)] Department, dated 04.05.2017 as Ultra Vires.

¶26

For Petitioner : Mr.M.Md.Zamil

¶27

for Mr.C.Venkatsh Kumar

¶28

For Respondents : Mr.M.Siddharthan Additional Government Pleader for R1, R1, R3 & R5

¶29

: Mr.K.S.Selvaganesan Additional Government Pleader for R4

¶30

2/6

¶31

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

¶32

W.P(MD) Nos.14400 & 14401 of 2017

¶33

COMMON ORDER

¶34

(Order of the Court was made by G.R.SWAMINATHAN, J.)

¶35

Heard both sides.

¶36

The petitioner challenges the validity of the Tamil Nadu Regularization of Unapproved Layouts and Plot Rules, 2017 issued in G.O.(Ms)No.78, Housing and Urban Development [UD 4(3)] Department dated 04.05.2017.

¶37

Though the rules are a piece of subordinate legislation, they can be assailed only on certain grounds. The petitioner must show that they are ultra vires provisions of the parent statute or they are unconstitutional. The competence of the authority to issue the Rules can also be pleaded. In the case on hand, no such grounds have been made

¶38

out. The prime grievance appears to be regarding the cut off date prescribed in the Rules ie., 20.10.2016. It is open to the authority issuing subordinate legislation to prescribe the cut off date in such cases. But then, there must be some object behind such prescription.

¶39

3/6

¶40

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

¶41

W.P(MD) Nos.14400 & 14401 of 2017

¶42

4. It is pointed out by the learned Additional Government Pleader

¶43

that Section 22A of the Registration Act which is a Tamil Nadu amendment though brought out in the year 2012 came into force only on 20.10.2016. In order to align the present Rules with the statutory scheme

¶44

underlying the Registration Act, 20.10.2016 has been chosen as the cut off date. Such a choice cannot be termed as arbitrary by any stretch of imagination. We therefore do not find any ground to interfere at all. The

¶45

Writ Petitions are dismissed. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.

¶46

(G.R.S., J.) (R.K.M., J.) 15.12.2025

¶47

Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes / No NCC : Yes / No rmi

¶48

¶49

1.The Secretary to Government, Housing and Urban Development (UD 4(3)) Department, Secretariat,

¶50

Chennai.

¶51