Allowed¶34

Kalaikannan M v. The Revenue Divisional Officer

Madras HC12 Sept 2025WP(MD)/24993/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Certiorari allowed (Madurai Bench, 12.09.2025): order dated 29.08.2025 in Ka.No.17/2025/A4 of Divisional Engineer, Highways, Madurai set aside for want of prior show cause notice under Section 28(2)(ii), Tamil Nadu Highways Act, 2001; order recast as show cause notice, reply within 2 weeks, hearing and completion of proceedings within 4 weeks; no costs; connected miscellaneous petition closed.

What did the court decide?

Impugned order dated 29.08.2025 in Ka.No.17/2025/A4 of the Divisional Engineer, Highways, Madurai set aside and treated as a show cause notice; petitioner to file a reply within two weeks; petitioner to be personally heard and proceedings concluded in accordance with law within four weeks from the date of personal hearing; no costs; connected Miscellaneous Petition (W.M.P(MD)No.19614 of 2025) closed. ¶34

Kalaikannan M Vs The Revenue Divisional Officer — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶34

Issue for consideration

Whether the impugned order dated 29.08.2025 in Ka.No.17/2025/A4 passed by the second respondent (Divisional Engineer, Highways, Madurai) could stand, given that it ought to have been preceded by a show cause notice under Section 28(2)(ii) of the Tamil Nadu Highways Act, 2001, which was not issued.

¶28

Court's answer

The impugned order dated 29.08.2025 passed by the second respondent/Divisional Engineer, Highways, Madurai ought to have been preceded by a show cause notice under Section 28(2)(ii) of the Tamil Nadu Highways Act, 2001, which was not issued; the Court accepted this position (put forward as a fair submission by the Additional Government Pleader) and acted upon it.

¶27

Ratio / Principle

The impugned order is set aside and shall be treated as a show cause notice; the petitioner shall file a reply to it within a period of two (2) weeks.

¶29

Key takeaways

Upon receipt of the reply, the petitioner shall be heard and the proceedings concluded in accordance with law within a period of four (4) weeks from the date of personal hearing.ratio¶33
The Writ Petition is allowed with no costs, and the connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.ratio¶34

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Madras High Court (Madurai Bench), W.P(MD)No.24993 of 2025, decided 12.09.2025 — order of the Court by Dr. Justice Anita Sumanth (bench: Dr. Justice Anita Sumanth and Justice C. Kumarappan). Petitioner M. Kalaikannan sought a Writ of Certiorari (under Article 226 of the Constitution of India) to quash the order dated 29.08.2025 in Ka.No.17/2025/A4 passed by the second respondent, Divisional Engineer, Highways, Madurai. The Additional Government Pleader for the respondents fairly submitted, and the Court accepted, that the impugned order ought to have been preceded by a show cause notice under Section 28(2)(ii) of the Tamil Nadu Highways Act, 2001, which was not issued. Accordingly, the impugned order was set aside and directed to be treated as a show cause notice; the petitioner was given two weeks to reply, with a personal hearing and conclusion of proceedings in accordance with law within four weeks from the date of hearing. Writ Petition allowed; no costs; connected W.M.P(MD)No.19614 of 2025 closed.

¶1

W.P(MD)No.24993 of 2025

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED: 12.09.2025

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HONOURABLE DR.JUSTICE ANITA SUMANTH AND

¶6

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN

¶7

W.P(MD)No.24993 of 2025 and

¶8

W.M.P(MD)No.19614 of 2025

M.Kalaikannan

... Petitioner

Vs.

1.The Revenue Divisional Officer, O/o.Revenue Divisional Office, Madurai.

¶13

2.The Divisional Engineer, Highways, Construction & Maintenance,

¶14

Madurai.

¶15

3.The Assistant Engineer, Highways, Construction & Maintenance,

¶16

Madurai.

¶17

4.The Tahsildar, O/o.Tahsildar, Vadipatti, Madurai.

¶18

... Respondents

¶19

¶20

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

¶21

W.P(MD)No.24993 of 2025

¶22

PRAYER:- Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of

¶23

PRAYER:- Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Certiorari, calling for the records pertaining to the impugned order passed by the second respondent in Ka.No.17/2025/A4 dated 29.08.2025 and quash the same.

¶24

For Petitioner : Ms.Rajalakshmi For RR 1 to 4 : Mr.M.Sarangan Additional Government Pleader

¶25

ORDER

¶26

(Order of the Court was made by DR.ANITA SUMANTH, J.)

¶27

Mr.M.Sarangan, learned Additional Government Pleader who

¶28

appears for the respondents would fairly submit that the impugned order dated 29.08.2025 passed by the second respondent/Divisional Engineer, Highways, Madurai ought to have been preceded by a show cause notice in terms of the provisions of Section 28(2)(ii) of the Tamil Nadu Highways Act, 2001, which has not been issued.

¶29

In such circumstances, the impugned order is set aside and shall be treated as a show cause notice by the petitioner, who shall file a reply to the same within a period of two (2) weeks from today. Upon

¶30

2/4

¶31

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

¶32

W.P(MD)No.24993 of 2025

¶33

receipt of the reply, the petitioner shall be heard and proceedings concluded in accordance with law, within a period of four (4) weeks from date of personal hearing.

¶34