Allowed¶30

Salavutheen v. The District Collector

Madras HC14 Nov 2025WP(MD)/32579/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Cellphone tower removal writ allowed; Article 226 mandamus; lease expired; 8 years unpaid rent; tower admitted disfunctional; dismantling and scrap-sale proceeds appropriated towards landowner's dues; GTL Infrastructure Limited as fifth respondent; Kulithalai, Karur District; District Collector / District Revenue Authority / RDO Kulithalai / Tahsildar Kulithalai as official respondents; representation dated 10.10.2022; single-judge order by G.R. Swaminathan J.; no costs.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition allowed with no costs; petitioner permitted to dismantle the fifth respondent's disfunctional cellphone tower on his land and to sell the resulting scrap, appropriating the sale proceeds towards his dues from the fifth respondent. ¶30

Salavutheen Vs The District Collector — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2025)

¶1

W.P(MD)No.32579 of 2025

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED : 14.11.2025

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.R.SWAMINATHAN

¶6

W.P(MD)No.32579 of 2025

A.Salavutheen

... Petitioner

Vs.

1.The District Collector, Karur District.

¶11

2.The District Revenue Authority, Karur District.

¶12

3.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Kulithalai Division, Karur District.

¶13

4.The Tahsildar, Kulithalai, Karur District.

¶14

5.GTL INFRASTRUCTURE LIMITED, City Centre 3^rd Floor, Old No.232 & 186 Purasawalkam High Road, Kilpauk, Chennai – 600 010. ... Respondents

¶15

1/4

¶16

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

¶17

W.P(MD)No.32579 of 2025

¶18

Prayer : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the first respondent to permit the petitioner to uninstall the left unmaintained cell Phone Tower of the fifth respondent situated at S.F.No. 85/5A, TS No. 26, D Ward, Block 17, Vandipettai Street, Kulithalai, Karur District, on the basis of the petitioner's representation dated 10.10.2022.

¶19

For Petitioner : Mr.A.Joseph Jerry For Respondents : Mr.R.Ragavendran Government Advocate for R.1 to R.4

¶20

Mr.R.Parthiban for R.5

¶21

ORDER

¶22

Heard both sides.

¶23

2.The petitioner is the owner of the petition mentioned land. He

¶24

entered into an agreement with the fifth respondent and permitted them to install a cell phone tower in his land. The lease period has long since expired. For the last 8 years, the fifth respondent is not paying any rent. The petitioner called upon the fifth respondent to remove the cellphone tower. Since the fifth respondent did not respond, the present writ petition has been filed.

¶25

2/4

¶26

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

¶27

W.P(MD)No.32579 of 2025

¶28

3.The fifth respondent has been served and he does not deny the

¶29

assertions made in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition. It is admitted that as on date, the cellphone tower has become disfunctional. The petitioner is permitted to dismantle the petition mentioned cellphone tower and sell the resulting scrap and appropriate the sale proceeds towards his dues from the fifth respondent.

¶30