Dismissed¶38

Suham Hospitals v. The Director of Municipal Administration

Madras HC15 Dec 2025WP(MD)/35748/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Madras High Court, Madurai Bench; W.P.(MD) No.35748 of 2025; decided 15.12.2025 by Dr. G. Jayachandran, J. and K.K. Ramakrishnan, J.; Suham Hospitals v. Director of Municipal Administration & others; building plan violation; unauthorized construction; OSR space; vehicle parking; Madurai Corporation notice dated 01.12.2025; demolition; lock and seal; non-compliance with earlier rectification direction; writ dismissed.

What did the court decide?

The petitioner failed to rectify the planning permit violations despite this Court's earlier specific direction to do so within three weeks; therefore the impugned notice granting fifteen days to rectify the defects and violations was validly issued. ¶35

Suham Hospitals Vs The Director of Municipal… — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2025)

¶1

W.P.(MD) No.35748 of 2025

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED : 15.12.2025

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HONOURABLE DR.JUSTICE G.JAYACHANDRAN and THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.K.RAMAKRISHNAN

¶6

W.P.(MD) No.35748 of 2025 and W.M.P.(MD) No.28351 of 2025

¶7

Suham Hospitals rep.by its Program Officer L.Jesuraja 47A, TB Road Mehaboobpalayam Madurai ... Petitioner

¶8

-vs-

¶9

1.The Director of Municipal Administration No.75, Urban Administration Buildings Santhom High Road MRC Nagar, Chennai-28

¶10

2.The Joint Director of Municipal Administration Nodal Officer No.75, Urban Administration Buildings Santhom High Road MRC Nagar, Chennai-28

¶11

Page 1 of 7

¶12

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

¶13

W.P.(MD) No.35748 of 2025

¶14

3.The Commissioner Madurai Corporation Office Mela Mart Street Madurai-625 001

¶15

4.The Assistance Commissioner Zone 3 (Central) Madurai Corporation Office Mela Mart Street Madurai-625 001

¶16

5.The Assistance Executive Engineer (Planning) Madurai Corporation Office Mela Mart Street Madurai-625 001

¶17

... Respondents

¶18

PRAYER: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a writ of certiorarified mandamus calling for the records of the respondents in connection with the order dated 01.12.2025 by the fourth respondent and

¶19

quash the same in so for as the petitioner is concerned and direct the respondents by restraining from taking any coercion action against the petitioner's approved building as constructed as per the process of law.

¶20

For Petitioner : Mr.S.Kumar for Mr.M.Venkatesan For Respondents : Mr.S.P.Maharajan Special Government Pleader for R1 & R2 Mr.S.Vinayak for R3 to R5

¶21

_____________ Page 2 of 7_

¶22

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

¶23

O R D E R

¶24

W.P.(MD) No.35748 of 2025

¶25

[Order of the Court was made by DR.G.JAYACHANDRAN, J.]

¶26

This writ petition has been filed by the building plan violator aggrieved by the impugned notice dated 01.12.2025, issued by the respondent – Corporation.

¶27

2. The impugned notice issued by the respondent – Corporation indicates that the same has been issued pursuant to the High Court order, dated 15.10.2025, passed in W.P.(MD) No.25518 of 2025. The relevant portion of the said order is extracted hereunder:

¶28

“Be that as it may, since such directions have been given and the petitioner has also complied with the same, we find no justification in passing of order dated 11.09.2025 in violation of principles of natural justice. Hence, the impugned order is set aside. The petitioner shall appear before R4 on 28.10.2025 accompanied by a copy of his reply dated 01.09.2025 and supporting documents, if any. He shall be granted audience, heard and the ongoing proceedings will be completed within a period of three weeks thereafter (ie., on or before 18.11.2025) in accordance with law.”

¶29

Page 3 of 7

¶30

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

¶31

W.P.(MD) No.35748 of 2025

¶32

3. The Assistant Commissioner, Madurai Corporation, having inspected the subject premises and verified the sale documents of the petitioner has found that the subject building has been constructed without giving OSR space and provisions for vehicle parking and hence, instructed the petitioner to remove unauthorized structures and rectify the defects within a period of fifteen days, or else, action will be taken for removal of the unauthorized structures and lock and seal proceedings will be initiated.

¶33

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that there is no building plan violation and the property was purchased by the petitioner as it is.

¶34

5. This Court finds that the petitioner herein has earlier approached this Court and this Court has passed a specific order that violation in the planning permit has to be rectified within a period of three weeks. However, the petitioner has not rectified the defects. Hence, the impugned notice came to be issued granting fifteen days for the petitioner to rectify the defects and violations.

¶35

_____________ Page 4 of 7_

¶36

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

¶37

W.P.(MD) No.35748 of 2025

¶38

6. In the above said circumstances, the petitioner has filed this writ petition challenging the notice issued by the respondent – Corporation. We find no merit in this writ petition. Hence, this writ petition is dismissed. The petitioner is expected to rectify the violations in the subject building, within the time prescribed, failing which, the authorities concerned have every right to demolish the violated portion of the building as well as to keep the premises under lock and seal. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

¶39

[G.J., J.] [K.K.R.K., J.]

¶40

15.12.2025 NCC : Yes / No Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes / No

¶41

krk

¶42

To: 1.The Director of Municipal Administration, No.75, Urban Administration Buildings, Santhom High Road, MRC Nagar, Chennai-28.

¶43

_____________ Page 5 of 7_

¶44

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