Dismissed¶24

Balanagammal, v. The Commissioner

Madras HC19 Dec 2025WP(MD)/36596/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Encroachment removal notice by municipal corporation upheld; writ of certiorari dismissed; Madurai Bench, Madras High Court; Dindigul Municipal Corporation; Government land vs patta land; measurement of land; Article 226; no costs; connected miscellaneous petitions closed; G.Jayachandran and K.K.Ramakrishnan, JJ.; 19.12.2025.

What did the court decide?

On perusal of the records, sufficient opportunities were given to the petitioner and others who encroached upon the Government land, and after a direction from this Court the respondent Corporation acted for removal of the encroachments. ¶17

Balanagammal, Vs The Commissioner — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2025)

¶1

W.P.(MD) No.36596 of 2025

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED : 19.12.2025

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

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

¶6

W.P.(MD) No.36596 of 2025 and

¶7

W.M.P.(MD) Nos.29099, 29101 & 29103 of 2025

¶8

Balanagammal ... Petitioner -vsThe Commissioner Dindigul Municipal Corporation Dindigul District ... Respondent

¶9

PRAYER: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a writ of certiorari to call for the records of the impugned order in Na.Ka.No. 39/2015/F1 dated 03.12.2025, on the file of the respondent and quash the same.

¶10

For Petitioner : Ms.K.Swathini for Mr.S.Selva Aditya For Respondent : Mr.J.Lawrance

¶11

_____________ Page 1 of 4_

¶12

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

¶13

O R D E R

¶14

W.P.(MD) No.36596 of 2025

¶15

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

¶16

The notice, dated 03.12.2025, issued by the respondent – Corporation, directing the petitioner to remove the encroachment made by her in the subject land, is under challenge in this writ petition by stating that measurement of the subject land has not been done in her presence.

¶17

2. However, on perusal of the records, this Court finds that sufficient opportunities have been given to the petitioner and others, who have encroached upon the Government land and after a direction from this Court, the respondent – Corporation has taken action for removal of the encroachments in the subject land.

¶18

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner states that the petitioner still believes that she has constructed the building only in her patta land.

¶19

4. This Court is not inclined to interfere with the impugned notice issued by the respondent – Corporation. If at all the petitioner is of the view that the building constructed by her in the subject land is well within the

¶20

_____________ Page 2 of 4_

¶21

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

¶22

W.P.(MD) No.36596 of 2025

¶23

patta land, she can take necessary steps for measurement of the land for her satisfaction. We make it clear that the respondent – Corporation shall, after fully satisfied regarding the area of encroachment, take necessary action for removal of the encroachments made by the petitioner and others in the subject land, if they are not removing the encroachments on their own.

¶24

5. With the above observations, this writ petition is dismissed. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.

¶25

[G.J., J.] [K.K.R.K., J.] 19.12.2025

¶26

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

¶27

krk

¶28

Page 3 of 4

¶29

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