Disposed

G. Venkatesh, v. Mr. Ganesan and 4 others

Madras HC10 Jul 2026CONT P/791/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Contempt petition alleging disobedience of a writ order directing authorities to consider the petitioner's representation. Authorities conducted a joint inspection and removed encroachments including a tree and lamp post; compliance affidavit filed. Court found compliance and closed the contempt petition and an impleadment application.

What did the court decide?

Contempt petition and impleadment sub-application closed, no costs imposed.

G. Venkatesh, Vs Mr. Ganesan and 4 others — Contempt of Court | Madras HC (2026)

¶1

Cont.P.No.791 of 2025

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED: 10.07.2026

¶4

CORAM :

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR. SUSHRUT ARVIND DHARMADHIKARI, CHIEF JUSTICE AND

¶6

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.ARUL MURUGAN

¶7

Contempt Petition No.791 of 2025 and Sub Application No.668 of 2025

¶8

Cont.P.No.791 of 2025:

¶9

G.Venkatesh, S/o.Govindarajan, 233, L.F. Road, Kachirapalayam Chinnasalem Taluk, Kallakurichi District - 606 207.

Petitioner

1.Ganesan

The Director of Town and Country Planning, C & E Market Road, Koyembedu, Chennai - 600 107.

¶14

2.Sivakumar,

¶15

The Assistant Director of Town and Country Planning, Villupuram Region, Villupuram - 605 602.

¶16

3.Prasanth,

¶17

The District Collector, Kallakurichi - 606 202.

¶18

_______________ Page 1 of 6_

¶19

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

¶20

Cont.P.No.791 of 2025

¶21

4.Chandrasekaran, The Block Development Officer, Kallakurichi Panchayat Union, Kallakurichi - 606 202.

¶22

5.Meena Murugan, The President, Madur Village Panchayat, Madur Village, Kallakurichi Taluk, Kallakurichi District - 606 206.

¶23

6.The Assistant Director of Survey and Land Records/Personal Assistant to District Collector, Kallakurichi District.

¶24

[Respondent No.6 suo-motu impleaded as per the order dated 7.4.2025)

¶25

Respondents

¶26

PRAYER: Petition filed under Section 11 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 to punish the respondents for the willful disobedience of the order dated 26.4.2024 passed in W.P.No.11675 of 2024.

¶27

For Petitioner: Mr.G.Narendiran for Mr.K.Magesh

¶28

For Respondents: Mr.K.Kumaran Government Pleader

¶29

Sub Application No.668 of 2025:

¶30

N.Balaji S/o.ANB Nagarajan, Partner of ANB Kalyanamandapam, Madur Village, Kallakurichi Taluk, Kallakurichi- 606202

¶31

Applicant

¶32

_______________ Page 2 of 6_

¶33

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

¶34

Cont.P.No.791 of 2025

¶35

1.G.vengatesh S/o. Govindarajan, 233, L.F. Road, Kachirapalayam Chinnasalem Taluk, Kallakurichi District - 606 207.

¶36

¶37

2.Ganesan

¶38

The Director of Town and Country Planning, C & E Market Road, Koyembedu, Chennai - 600 107.

¶39

3.Sivakumar,

¶40

The Assistant Director of Town and Country Planning, Villupuram Region, Villupuram - 605 602.

¶41

4.Prasanth,

¶42

The District Collector, Kallakurichi - 606 202.

¶43

5.Chandrasekaran,

¶44

The Block Development Officer, Kallakurichi Panchayat Union, Kallakurichi - 606 202.

¶45

6.Meena Murugan, The President, Madur Village Panchayat, Kallakurichi Taluk, Kallakurichi District - 606 206.

¶46

7.The Assistant Director of Survey and Records/ Personal Assistant to District Collector, Kallakurichi District District

¶47

Respondents

¶48

_______________ Page 3 of 6_

¶49

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

¶50

Cont.P.No.791 of 2025

¶51

PRAYER: Petition filed under Section 151 C.P.C. to implead the

¶52

PRAYER: Petition filed under Section 151 C.P.C. to implead the applicant who is third party to the above contempt petition as 7^th respondent in the contempt petition.

¶53

For Applicant: Mr.K.V.Muthu Visakan

¶54

For Respondents: Mr.G.Narendiran for Mr.K.Magesh for R1

¶55

Mr.K.Kumaran Government Pleader for R2 to R7

¶56

ORDER

¶57

(Order of the Court was made by G.Arul Murugan, J. )

¶58

This contempt petition is filed alleging disobedience of the order dated 26.4.2024 passed in W.P.No.11675 of 2024.

¶59

This Court, vide order dated 26.4.2024, has directed the respondent authorities to consider the representation of the petitioner on its own merits and take a decision. Pursuant to the order passed by this Court, a joint inspection was conducted on 28.4.2025 and the encroachments that were noted, which include tree and lamp post, were removed. The same has also been communicated to the District Collector, vide letter dated 26.5.2025 of the Assistant Director, Survey

¶60

Page 4 of 6

¶61

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

¶62

Cont.P.No.791 of 2025

¶63

and Land Records.

¶64

The second respondent has filed the compliance affidavit, affirmed on 3.6.2026, reporting compliance of the order of this Court.

¶65

Since the respondent authorities have acted upon the representation of the petitioner and encroachments have been removed, we find that the order of this Court has been complied with. Accordingly, the contempt petition is closed. No costs.

¶66

In view of closing of the contempt petition, no order needs to be passed in Sub Application No.668 of 2025 seeking impleadment and, accordingly, same is also closed.

¶67

(SUSHRUT ARVIND DHARMADHIKARI, CJ) (G.ARUL MURUGAN,J) 10.07.2026 Index : Yes/No Neutral Citation : Yes/No bbr

¶68

_______________ Page 5 of 6_

¶69

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

¶70

Cont.P.No.791 of 2025

¶71

THE HON'BLE CHIEF JUSTICE AND G.ARUL MURUGAN,J.

¶72

bbr

¶73

Contempt Petition No.791 of 2025

¶74

10.07.2026

¶75

_______________ Page 6 of 6_

¶76

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

G. Venkatesh, v. Mr. Ganesan and 4 others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

G. Venkatesh, v. Mr. Ganesan and 4 others

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

The Principal Vs The Dental Council of India

T.Tamilselvi Vs Yasodha

Lakshmi Jeeva Vs Gagandeep Singh Bedi

M/s Multivista Global Private Limited Vs Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax

Airports Authority of India, Vs Goldair India Private Limited

Vandana Parvez Vs The Government of India