Dismissed

S.Chandrasekar v. The Union of India

Madras HC12 Mar 2026WP/25828/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Madras High Court dismissed a writ petition by the holders of ponds and odai who sought direction to the NHAI and Revenue Authorities to stop road laying and restore the encroached lands. The court ruled that since the metal road is already laid and in public use, the requested relief is no longer warranted.

What did the court decide?

No order as to costs; connected miscellaneous petition closed.

S.Chandrasekar Vs The Union of India — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2026)

¶1

W.P.No.25828 of 2022

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED : 12.03.2026

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S. M. SUBRAMANIAM AND

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE K. SURENDER

¶7

W.P.No.25828 of 2022 and

¶8

W.M.P.No.24898 of 2022

¶9

S.Chandrasekar S/o.Seerangasamy Gounder

¶10

... Petitioner

¶11

vs.

¶12

The Union of India Rep. By the Secretary to Government Ministry of Shipping, Road Transport and Highways Department of Road Transport and Highways New Delhi.

¶13

The Project Director National Highway Authority of India (Dindigul – Pollachi National Highways No.209) Sennammanaikenpatti Dindigul – 4.

¶14

The District Collector Tiruppur District Tiruppur.

¶15

The Tahsildar Madathukulam Taluk Madathukulam.

¶16

Page Nos.1/5

¶17

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

¶18

W.P.No.25828 of 2022

¶19

5. Karupannan S/o.Semalaigounder

¶20

S.Punadhavali Nayagi W/o.Late Shivaraj … Respondents

¶21

R6 impleaded vide order dated 12.03.2026 passed in W.M.P.No.34957 of 2023 in W.P.No.25828 of 2022

¶22

Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking a Writ of Mandamus, forbearing the respondents 1 and 2 to lay road on the pond namely, “Karuppasamy Kulam” comprised in Survey No.522 of Myvadi Village, Madathukulam Taluk, Tiruppur District and consequently, direct the respondents 3 and 4 to remove the encroachment made by the 5^th respondent in the Odai comprised in Survey No.525 of Myvadi Village, Madathukulam Taluk, Tiruppur District and further direct the respondents 1 to 4 to restore the above said pond and the Odai within a time frame as fixed by this Hon’ble Court by considering the petitioner’s representation dated 16.08.2022.

¶23

For Petitioner : Mr.J.Aravind for Mr.R.Kannan For Respondents : R1 – No appearance Mr.K.Guru Prasad for Mr.Su.Srinivasan Standing Counsel for NHAI, for R2 Mr.T.Arunkumar, Additional Government Pleader for R3 and R4 R5 – died Mr.Rishinandhan for Ms.S.Akila, for R6 *********

¶24

Page Nos.2/5

¶25

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

¶26

W.P.No.25828 of 2022

¶27

O R D E R

¶28

[Made by S.M.SUBRAMANIAM, J., ]

¶29

The writ of mandamus has been instituted to forbear the respondents 1 and 2 to lay road on the pond namely, “Karuppasamy Kulam” comprised in Survey No.522 of Myvadi Village, Madathukulam Taluk, Tiruppur District and consequently, direct the respondents 3 and 4 to remove the encroachment made by the 5^th respondent in the Odai comprised in Survey No.525 of Myvadi Village, Madathukulam Taluk, Tiruppur District and further direct the respondents 1 to 4 to restore the above said pond and the Odai by considering the petitioner’s representation dated 16.08.2022.

¶30

Both the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel for the National Highways Authority of India would submit that the National Highways Authority of India has already laid a metal road and that the road is presently in public use.

¶31

Since the metal road has already been laid by the National Highways Authority of India and the same is in public usage, the relief sought for in the present writ petition does not warrant any further consideration.

¶32

Page Nos.3/5

¶33

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

¶34

W.P.No.25828 of 2022

¶35

Accordingly, the Writ Petition stands dismissed. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶36

(S.M.S.,J.) (K.S.,J.) 12.03.2026

¶37

Index : Yes Neutral Citation : Yes / No Speaking / Non-speaking mk

¶38

¶39

The Union of India Rep. By the Secretary to Government Ministry of Shipping, Road Transport and Highways Department of Road Transport and Highways New Delhi.

¶40

The Project Director National Highway Authority of India (Dindigul – Pollachi National Highways No.209) Sennammanaikenpatti Dindigul – 4.

¶41

The District Collector Tiruppur District Tiruppur.

¶42

The Tahsildar Madathukulam Taluk Madathukulam.

¶43

Page Nos.4/5

¶44

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

¶45

W.P.No.25828 of 2022

¶46

S. M. SUBRAMANIAM, J., and K. SURENDER, J.,

¶47

¶48

W.P.No.25828 of 2022

12.03.2026

(2/2)

Page Nos.5/5

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

S.Chandrasekar v. The Union of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

S.Chandrasekar v. The Union of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

P.Kannadhasan Vs the District Collector

G.R.Nagaiyan, Vs The Secretary

P.Sekar Vs the District Collector

Arumugam Vs The District Collector

S.Vajravelu Vs The President

Lion.G.Devarajan Vs The District Collector