Disposed

G.Rajinikanth, S/O,Gopal, v. the Commissioner of

Madras HC26 Jun 2025WP(MD)/4072/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petition sought removal of encroachment by the fourth respondent on a government poramboke pathway. The Government Pleader stated encroachments were identified and action would be taken. The Court directed respondents 1 and 2 to complete proceedings and remove encroachments per applicable procedure within twelve weeks.

What did the court decide?

Respondents 1 and 2 directed to remove the encroachments following statutory procedure within twelve weeks; no costs.

G.Rajinikanth, S/O,Gopal, Vs the Commissioner of — Municipal and Town Planning | Madras HC (2025)

¶1

W.P.(MD)No.4072 of 2019

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED : 26.06.2025

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM AND

¶6

THE HONOURABLE DR.JUSTICE A.D.MARIA CLETE

¶7

W.P.(MD)No.4072 of 2019

G.Rajinikanth

... Petitioner

Vs.

1.The Commissioner of Municipality, Sankarankovil Panchayat Union, Sankarankovil, Tirunelveli District.

¶12

2.The Tahsildar, Sankarankovil Taluk, Tirunelveli District.

¶13

3.The Inspector of Police, Sankarankovil Town Police Station, Sankarankovil, Tirunelveli District.

¶14

4.M.P.Krishnan ...Respondents

¶15

PRAYER: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Mandamus, to direct the respondents 1 to 3 to remove the encroachment

¶16

1/4

¶17

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

¶18

W.P.(MD)No.4072 of 2019

¶19

made by the 4th respondent in government poramboke pathway in Town Survey No. 69 in Ambedkar Nagar 1st street, Sankarankovil Taluk, Tirunelveli District.

¶20

For Petitioner : Mr.R.J.Karthick For R1 : Mr.M.Rajarajan For R2 : Mr.P.Thilak Kumar Government Pleader For R3 : Mr.T.Senthilkumar Additional Public Prosecutor For R4 : Mr.K.Prabhu

¶21

ORDER

¶22

(Order of the Court was made by S.M.SUBRAMANIAM, J. )

¶23

With reference to the relief sought for in the writ petition, the learned Government Pleader appearing for the second respondent would submit that the second respondent had conducted a field inspection and identify the encroachments. Further, the learned Government Pleader states that the authorities will initiate all appropriate action to evict the encroachments by following the procedure as contemplated.

¶24

In view of the said submission, the respondents 1 & 2 are directed to complete the actions and remove the encroachments by following the procedure

¶25

2/4

¶26

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

¶27

W.P.(MD)No.4072 of 2019

¶28

under the relevant statutes and rules in force, within a period of twelve (12) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶29

With the above directions, the writ petition is disposed of. No costs.

¶30

(S.M.S., J.) & (A.D.M.C., J.) 26.06.2025

¶31

NCC : Yes / No Index : Yes / No am

¶32

¶33

1.The Commissioner of Municipality, Sankarankovil Panchayat Union, Sankarankovil, Tirunelveli District.

¶34

2.The Tahsildar, Sankarankovil Taluk, Tirunelveli District.

¶35

3.The Inspector of Police, Sankarankovil Town Police Station, Sankarankovil, Tirunelveli District.

¶36

3/4

¶37

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

¶38

W.P.(MD)No.4072 of 2019

¶39

S.M.SUBRAMANIAM, J.

¶40

AND DR.A.D.MARIA CLETE, J.

¶41

¶42

W.P.(MD)No.4072 of 2019

¶43

26.06.2025

¶44

4/4

¶45

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

G.Rajinikanth, S/O,Gopal, v. the Commissioner of

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

G.Rajinikanth, S/O,Gopal, v. the Commissioner of

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

R.Maheshwaran Vs The Inspector General of Registration

G.Kannadasan, Vs the Secretary to Government

The Member Secretary Vs Manikandan

Thangavel Vs The District Collector

B.Muthupandi, S/O.Bose, Vs the Managing Director

Gurunathan.K Vs the Law Secretary of India