Skip to content

The research platform for Indian law — judgements, legislation and the citations between them. Free to search, with the original document behind every result.

A product of LawSathi.

Research

Search Legislation Research tools

Browse

Courts Case types Topics Most-cited judgements Sources

LawSathi

Practice platform Blog

© 2026 LawSathiTerms PrivacyResearch aid, not the official record.

Singaravelu Vs The District collector — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2026)

Home
Madras HC
2026
Singaravelu Vs The District collectorSingaravelu v. The District collector

Dismissed¶¶30

Singaravelu v. The District collector

Madras HC22 Jan 2026WP/1499/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Madras High Court, WP No. 1499 of 2026 and WMP No.1625 of 2026, decided 22-01-2026 (Division Bench; order made by Chief Justice Manindra Mohan Shrivastava, sitting with G.Arul Murugan J.). Petitioners Singaravelu and Venkateswaran sought a writ of mandamus under Article 226 directing the Joint Director/Assistant Director of Town and Country Planning and the Executive Officer, Kottur Town Panchayat (respondents 3 and 4) to remove alleged illegal and unauthorised construction by 5th respondent Rajendran in Plot Nos. 44 and 45, Ullas Nagar III, Kottur Town Panchayat, Anaimalai Taluk, Coimbatore District. Petition dismissed with no costs because Form I–III notices had already been issued (30.09.2025, 16.10.2025, 23.10.2025) and a suit was pending before the District Munsif, Pollachi. Keywords: mandamus; unauthorised construction; Form I/Form II/Form III notice; representation and reminders; interim application closed.

What did the court decide?

In view of the State counsel's disclosure that the authorities have already initiated action against the alleged illegal construction of the 5th respondent (Form I Notice dated 30.09.2025, followed by Form II and Form III removal notices dated 16.10.2025 and 23.10.2025) and that the 5th respondent has filed a suit before the District Munsif, Pollachi, the writ petition cannot be continued and is dismissed, with no order as to costs, and the connected interim application is closed. ¶¶29

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Dismissed

Issue for consideration

Whether a writ of mandamus should issue directing respondents 3 and 4 to remove the alleged illegal and unauthorised construction put up in Plot Nos. 44 and 45 of Ullas Nagar III, Kottur Town Panchayat, Anaimalai Taluk, Coimbatore District, within a time frame to be fixed by the Court. +1 more

Ratio / Principle

In view of the State counsel's disclosure that the authorities have already initiated action against the alleged illegal construction of the 5th respondent (Form I Notice dated 30.09.2025, followed by Form II and Form III removal notices dated 16.10.2025 and 23.10.2025) and that the 5th respondent has filed a suit before the District Munsif, Pollachi, the writ petition cannot be continued and is dismissed, with no order as to costs, and the connected interim application is closed.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Writ Petition (Art. 226 — Mandamus — removal of alleged illegal and unauthorised construction): Petitioners sought a direction to respondents 3 and 4 (Town planning / Town Panchayat authorities) to remove the construction allegedly put up by the 5th respondent in Plot Nos. 44 and 45, Ullas Nagar III, Kottur Town Panchayat, Anaimalai Taluk, Coimbatore District, pursuant to their representation dated 09.12.2024 and reminders dated 20.01.2025 and 24.11.2025. On the allegation being raised, State counsel disclosed that the authorities had already acted: Form I Notice was issued on 30.09.2025, followed by notices in Form II and Form III for removal on 16.10.2025 and 23.10.2025; the 5th respondent had also filed a suit before the District Munsif, Pollachi. Held, in view of that disclosure the petition cannot be continued. Petition dismissed; no order as to costs; connected interim application closed. (Order of the Court made by the Chief Justice.)

A

WP No.1499 of 2026

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 22-01-2026

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR.MANINDRA MOHAN SHRIVASTAVA, CHIEF JUSTICE AND THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE G.ARUL MURUGAN

WP No. 1499 of 2026 and WMP No.1625 of 2026

Singaravelu 2. Venkateswaran

..Petitioner(s)

Vs

The District Collector, Coimbatore 641 018.

The Joint Director of Town and Country Planning, Town and Country Planning Office, Dr Nanjappa Salai, Coimbatore 641 018.

Assistant Director of Town Panchaayats, Coimbatore Distrct, Collectorate, Coimbatore 641 018.

The Executive Officer, Kottur Town panchayat, Anaimalai Taluk, Coimbatore District 642 114.

5. Rajendran

..Respondent(s)

Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of Writ of Mandamus directing the official Page 1 of 4

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

WP No.1499 of 2026

respondents particularly 3rd and 4th respondents to remove the illegal and unauthorised construction put up in Plot Nos. 44 and 45 of Ullas Nagar III, Kottur Town Panchayat, Anaimalai Taluk, Coimbatore District 642 114, within a time frame to be fixed by this Hon’ble Court, by considering the petitioners’ representation dated 09.12.2024 and remainders dated 20.01.2025 and 24.11.2025

For Petitioner(s): MR.K.V.Muthuvisakan For Respondent(s): MR.A.Edwin Prabakar State Govt. Pleader Assisted by Mr.M.Habeeb Rahman, Govt. Advocate, for RR 1 to 4.

ORDER

(Order of the Court was made by The Chief Justice)

In response to the allegation of illegal construction by 5^th respondent, learned State counsel, upon instructions, would submit that the authorities have initiated action and Form I Notice has been issued on 30.09.2025, followed by notices in Form II and Form III for removal on 16.10.2025 and 23.10.2025 respectively. However, the 5^th respondent has filed a suit in the Court of District Munsif, Pollachi.

Page 2 of 4

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

WP No.1499 of 2026

In view of the said disclosure, which is clear from the

documents which have been placed before the Court by the learned State Counsel, this petition cannot be continued.

Petition is, therefore, dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, the interim application stands closed.

(MANINDRA MOHAN SHRIVASTAVA, C.J.) (G.ARUL MURUGAN J.) 22-01-2026

sra

To

The District Collector, Coimbatore 641 018.

The Joint Director of Town and Country Planning Town and Country Planning Office, Dr Nanjappa Salai Coimbatore 641 018.

The Assistant Director of Town Panchaayats, Coimbatore Distrct, Collectorate, Coimbatore 641 018.

The Executive Officer, Kottur Town panchayat, Anaimalai Taluk, Coimbaotre District 642 114.

Page 3 of 4

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

WP No.1499 of 2026

The Hon’ble Chief Justice and G.Arul Murugan, J.

(sra)

WP No. 1499 of 2026

22-01-2026

Page 4 of 4

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

Issues for consideration

2 issues framed by the court

AI extract

1.
Whether a writ of mandamus should issue directing respondents 3 and 4 to remove the alleged illegal and unauthorised construction put up in Plot Nos. 44 and 45 of Ullas Nagar III, Kottur Town Panchayat, Anaimalai Taluk, Coimbatore District, within a time frame to be fixed by the Court.¶¶19
2.
Whether the writ petition can be continued once the authorities have already initiated action against the alleged illegal construction (Form I, Form II and Form III notices) and the 5th respondent has filed a suit before the District Munsif, Pollachi.¶¶29
The court held
In view of the State counsel's disclosure that the authorities have already initiated action against the alleged illegal construction of the 5th respondent (Form I Notice dated 30.09.2025, followed by Form II and Form III removal notices dated 16.10.2025 and 23.10.2025) and that the 5th respondent has filed a suit before the District Munsif, Pollachi, the writ petition cannot be continued and is dismissed, with no order as to costs, and the connected interim application is closed.ratio¶¶29

Statutes considered

1 provisions across 1 enactments

AI extract

Constitution of IndiaArticle 226¶¶16

Procedural history

How this case reached the court

AI extract

Prior proceeding
Petitioners made a representation dated 09.12.2024 and reminders dated 20.01.2025 and 24.11.2025 to the official respondents seeking removal of the alleged illegal construction.¶¶19
Prior proceeding
Upon instructions, State counsel disclosed that the authorities have initiated action against the 5th respondent: Form I Notice issued on 30.09.2025, followed by notices in Form II and Form III for removal on 16.10.2025 and 23.10.2025 respectively.¶¶24
Prior proceeding
The 5th respondent has filed a suit in the Court of District Munsif, Pollachi.¶¶24

Parties & counsel

AI extract

petitioner
Singaravelu¶¶7
MR.K.V.Muthuvisakan
petitioner
Venkateswaran¶¶7
MR.K.V.Muthuvisakan
respondent
The District Collector, Coimbatore 641 018¶¶10
MR.A.Edwin Prabakar, M.Habeeb Rahman
respondent
The Joint Director of Town and Country Planning, Town and Country Planning Office, Dr Nanjappa Salai, Coimbatore 641 018¶¶11
MR.A.Edwin Prabakar, M.Habeeb Rahman
respondent
Assistant Director of Town Panchaayats, Coimbatore Distrct, Collectorate, Coimbatore 641 018¶¶12
MR.A.Edwin Prabakar, M.Habeeb Rahman
respondent
The Executive Officer, Kottur Town panchayat, Anaimalai Taluk, Coimbatore District 642 114¶¶13
MR.A.Edwin Prabakar, M.Habeeb Rahman
respondent
Rajendran¶¶14

Coram

AI extract

Manindra Mohan Shrivastavaauthor¶¶23
G.Arul Muruganmember¶¶5

Case details

As recorded by the court registry

Court: Madras HC
Decided on: 22 Jan 2026 · January
Registered: 10 Jan 2026
Case no.: WP/1499/2026
CNR: HCMA010012742026
Topic: Writ and Judicial Review
Bench: G.arul Murugan
Disposal: DISMISSED
Case type: WP

Similar cases

Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court

Finding judgements on the same questions…

More from G.arul Murugan

The Commissioner Vs Kannammal Educational Trust
21 Jan 2026
The Tamil Nadu Housing Board, Vs C.Velusamy
21 Jan 2026
The Managing Director Vs Y.Sudhakar
21 Jan 2026
Phoenix and Co., Vs the State of Tamil Nadu
22 Jan 2026
K.M.G.Hasan Abdul Cader Vs the Commissioner
22 Jan 2026
M/S. Bloom Life Hospital Pvt. Ltd. Vs The Chairperson
22 Jan 2026

Cite this judgement

Singaravelu v. The District collector, WP/1499/2026 (MAD), decided on 22 January 2026.

The Madras High Court publishes no neutral citation for this judgement — cite it by case number and date of decision.

Statutes1

Constitution of IndiaArticle 226

View all statutes

Procedural history3

Petitioners made a representation dated 09.12.2024 and reminders dated 20.01.2025 and 24.11.2025 to the official respondents seeking removal of the alleged illegal construction.
Upon instructions, State counsel disclosed that the authorities have initiated action against the 5th respondent: Form I Notice issued on 30.09.2025, followed by notices in Form II and Form III for removal on 16.10.2025 and 23.10.2025 respectively.

View full history

Bench / Coram

Manindra Mohan Shrivastava and G.Arul Murugan

Parties & counsel