Disposed¶31

S.Anthony Michael v. The Commissioner

Madras HC29 Jun 2026WP/24495/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

WP No. 24495 of 2026, Madras High Court, decided 29-06-2026 by Hemant Chandangoudar, J. Keywords: Greater Chennai Corporation; building plan approval cancellation; PPA/WDCN14/04513/2025; BA/WDCN14/06162/2025 dated 19.08.2025; writ of Mandamus; Article 226 of Constitution of India; representations dated 07.04.2025, 26.09.2025 and 25.05.2026; patta cancellation; Survey No.51/1A Plot No.2A 25 cents; fourth respondent Mallikinisha; direction to consider representations with hearing within four weeks; disposed with no costs.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the second respondent to consider the petitioner's representations dated 07.04.2025, 26.09.2025 and 25.05.2026, afford an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and the fourth respondent, and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law within four (4) weeks; no order as to costs.

S.Anthony Michael Vs The Commissioner — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶31

Issue for consideration

Whether the second respondent should be directed to consider the petitioner's representations dated 07.04.2025, 26.09.2025 and 25.05.2026 seeking cancellation of the building plan approvals granted in favour of the fourth respondent.

¶23

Court's answer

Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the rival claims, the Court directed the second respondent to consider the petitioner's representations dated 07.04.2025, 26.09.2025 and 25.05.2026, afford an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner as well as the fourth respondent, and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law within a period of four (4) weeks from receipt of a copy of the order.

¶30

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Madras High Court (Hemant Chandangoudar, J.) disposed of a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India filed by S. Anthony Michael, who claimed ownership of Survey No.51/1A, Plot No.2A measuring 25 cents acquired under a registered sale deed, and alleged that the fourth respondent, despite having no right or title and suppressing that the patta standing in his name had been cancelled, obtained building plan approvals Nos. PPA/WDCN14/04513/2025 and BA/WDCN14/06162/2025 dated 19.08.2025 from the second respondent; the petitioner's representations dated 07.04.2025, 26.09.2025 and 25.05.2026 seeking cancellation were not considered. Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the rival claims, the Court directed the second respondent to consider the representations, afford hearing to the petitioner and the fourth respondent, and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law within four weeks. Writ petition disposed of; no order as to costs.

¶1

WP No. 24495 of 2026

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED: 29-06-2026

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR

¶6

WP No. 24495 of 2026

S.Anthony Michael

..Petitioner

The Commissioner Greater Chennai corporation, Ribbon Building, Chennai 03

¶11

The Executive Engineer Town planning, Greater Chennai corporation, Ribbon Building, Chennai 03

¶12

The Assistant Executive engineer Zone 14, Greater Chennai corporation, Puzhuthivakkam, 600 091

¶13

Mallikinisha

¶14

..Respondent(s)

¶15

Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India, praying for issuance of writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents 1 to 3 to consider the petitioner representations dated 7.04.2025, 26.09.2025 and

¶16

Page1 of 5

¶17

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

¶18

WP No. 24495 of 2026

¶19

25.05.2026 and consequently direct the respondents to cancel the building plan approval in no. PPA/ WDCN14/ 04513/ 2025 and BA/ WDCN14/ 06162/ 2025 dated on 19.08.2025 by 2nd respondent within stipulated time as fixed by this Honble court and pass orders.

¶20

For Petitioner(s): Mr. N.A. Nassir Hussain For Mr. G. Mohan

¶21

For Respondent(s): M/s. P. Prithivi Chopda

¶22

ORDER

¶23

The petitioner has approached this Court seeking a direction to respondents 1 to 3 to consider his representations dated 07.04.2025, 26.09.2025 and 25.05.2026 and, consequently, to cancel the building plan approval bearing Nos. PPA/WDCN14/04513/2025 and BA/WDCN14/06162/2025, both dated 19.08.2025, granted by the second respondent in favour of the fourth respondent.

¶24

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is the owner of the property comprising Survey No.51/1A, Plot No.2A, measuring an extent of 25 cents, having acquired the same under a registered sale deed. It is the petitioner’s case that the fourth respondent, despite having no right or title over the property and suppressing the fact that the patta standing in his name had already been cancelled, obtained the impugned building plan approval from the

¶25

Page2 of 5

¶26

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

¶27

WP No. 24495 of 2026

¶28

second respondent. Aggrieved thereby, the petitioner submitted representations dated 07.04.2025, 26.09.2025 and 25.05.2026 seeking cancellation of the building plan approval. However, the said representations have not been considered till date.

¶29

Learned counsel appearing for respondents 1 to 3 submitted that the petitioner’s representations would be considered on their own merits and appropriate orders would be passed in accordance with law within the time stipulated by this Court.

¶30

In view of the above submission, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the rival claims, the second respondent is directed to consider the petitioner’s representations dated 07.04.2025, 26.09.2025 and 25.05.2026, afford an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner as well as the fourth respondent, and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law within a period of four (4) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶31