A.P.Selvam Vs The Government — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2026)

A.P.Selvam Vs The Government — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Respondents 1 and 2 directed to pass final orders on merits and in accordance with law on the petitioner's representation dated 30.12.2025 seeking an alternate site, within twelve weeks of receipt of a copy of the order; no costs awarded; connected Miscellaneous Petitions closed.

Issue for consideration

Whether the respondents should consider the petitioner's representation dated 30.12.2025 seeking an alternate site, on merits and in accordance with law, within a time frame to be fixed by the Court.

Court's answer

No prejudice would be caused to the respondents if the petitioner's representation dated 30.12.2025 is considered on merits and in accordance with law within a time frame to be fixed by the Court.

Ratio / Principle

The Writ Petition was disposed of by directing respondents 1 and 2 to pass final orders on merits and in accordance with law on the petitioner's representation dated 30.12.2025 seeking an alternate site, within twelve weeks.

Key takeaways

The Court expressly refrained from expressing any opinion on the merits of the petitioner's representation, leaving the substantive question open.obiter¶39

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Madras High Court (Abdul Quddhose, J.), W.P.No.13122 of 2020 (connected W.M.P.Nos.16250 & 16251 of 2020), decided 06.01.2026 - Land assignment/patta matter concerning members of a petitioner's association at Akkarai village, Shozhinganallur Taluk. The writ, filed under Article 226 seeking certiorarified mandamus, originally challenged the District Collector, Chennai's order dated 29.11.2019 (Proc. No. NA.KA.NO 23906/2018/J10) declaring the disclosed alternate site 'marshy land' and unfit for allotment. Before the Court, the petitioner abandoned that challenge and confined itself to seeking consideration of its representation dated 30.12.2025 for an alternate site, relying on Paras 5 and 6 of the Collector's counter affidavit recording an alternate allotment reportedly ordered on 01.11.1993 vide Lr.No.O.Mu.4777/93 by the Commissioner of Land Administration. Holding that no prejudice would ensue, and expressly declining to opine on the merits, the Court disposed of the writ by directing the Government of Tamil Nadu and the Commissioner of Land Administration (respondents 1 and 2) to pass final orders on merits and in accordance with law on the representation within twelve weeks; no costs; connected Miscellaneous Petitions closed.

W.P.No. 13122 of 2020

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 06.01.2026

Coram

The Honourable Mr.Justice Abdul Quddhose

W.P.No.13122 of 2020 and

W.M.P.Nos.16250 & 16251 of 2020

1 A.P.Selvam

2 M.SELVI W/O. MAYAVEL

3 R.SHANKAR S/O. RANGARAJ

4 C.BOOBESH S/O. CHITIRAI

5 M.AROKIASAMI S/O. MARIA SUSAI ...Petitioners

Vs.

1 The Government of Tamil Nadu Rep by its Secretary to Government Department of Revenue Fort.St.George Chennai-9

2 The Addl chief Secretary / Commissioner of Land Administration Ezhilagam, Chepauk, Chennai-600 005.

3 The District collector Chennai District

4 The Revenue Divisional officer Chennai South, Guindy, Chennai District.

5 The Tahsildar Shozhinganallur Taluk Chennai District.

...Respondents

Prayer

Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the

1/6

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

W.P.No. 13122 of 2020 entire records pertaining to the impugned order of the 3rd Respondent In proceedings No NA.KA.NO 23906/2018/J10 dated 29.11.2019 and quash the same and to direct the respondents herein to grant patta to the members of the petitioner’s association and assigned the land to the members of the petitioners with appropriate description in the place identified at Akkarai village Shozhinganallur Taluk kanceepuram District.

For Petitioner : Mr.P.V.Balasubramaniam Senior Counsel for Mr.S.V.Vijay Prashanth

For Respondents : Mr.R.Ramanlal Additional Advocate General assisted by Mr.D.Ravichander, Special Government Pleader

Order

This Writ Petition has been filed challenging the order of the third

respondent, viz., the District Collector, Chennai, dated 29.11.2019, under

which, it is stated that the alternate site (as disclosed therein) classified as

‘’marshy land’’ is not suitable for allotment as an alternate site to the petitioner.

2. The learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner, on instructions, would submit that eventhough the impugned order dated 29.11.2019 as stated supra, has been challenged in this Writ Petition, the 2/6

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

W.P.No. 13122 of 2020 petitioner is now not interested in challenging the same, but will be satisfied

if the representation dated 30.12.2025 given to the respondents relying upon para Nos.5 and 6 of the counter affidavit filed by the third respondent, wherein, it is stated that an alternate allotment is reported to have been ordered by the second respondent on 01.11.1993, vide proceedings in Lr.No.O.Mu.4777/93 dated 01.11.1993 to the third respondent and the Association was moving before the High Court for allotment of lands in Shenoy Nagar is considered on merits and in accordance with law. Based on the said averment made in the counter affidavit filed by the third respondent, learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is now claiming for an alternate site in lieu of the sites disclosed in the impugned order of the third respondent dated 29.11.2019.

3. Since in the counter affidavit filed by the third respondent, more particularly, in Para No.5, it is stated that an alternate allotment is reported to have been ordered by the second respondent on 01.11.1993, vide proceedings in Lr.No.O.Mu.4777/93 dated 01.11.1993, this Court is of the considered view that no prejudice would be caused to the respondents, if the representation of the petitioner dated 30.12.2025 is considered on merits and

3/6

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

W.P.No. 13122 of 2020 in accordance with law by the respondents within a time frame to be fixed by this Court. This Court is not expressing any opinion on the merits of the representation made by the petitioner.

4. For the foregoing reasons, after recording the submissions made by the learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is not challenging the order dated 29.11.2019 passed by the third respondent and also recording the other submissions made by the learned Additional Advocate General appearing for the respondents, this Writ Petition is disposed of by directing the respondents 1 and 2 to pass final orders on merits and in accordance with law on the petitioner’s representation dated 30.12.2025 seeking for alternate site, as prayed for in the said representation within a period of twelve weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petitions are closed.

06.01.2026

sd Index : yes/no Neutral Citation : yes/no 4/6

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

W.P.No. 13122 of 2020

To

1 The Government of Tamil Nadu Rep by its Secretary to Government Department of Revenue Fort.St.George Chennai-9

2 The Addl chief Secretary / Commissioner of Land Administration Ezhilagam, Chepauk, Chennai-600 005.

3 The District collector Chennai District

4 The Revenue Divisional officer

Chennai South, Guindy, Chennai District.

5 The Tahsildar Shozhinganallur Taluk Chennai District.

5/6

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

W.P.No. 13122 of 2020

Abdul Quddhose,J.,

sd

W.P.No.13122 of 2020

06.01.2026

6/6

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