Dismissed¶¶20

M.K.Saimohan v. The Commissioner

Madras HC27 Jul 2026WP/28953/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Dismissed as withdrawn; Madras High Court; W.P.No.28953 of 2026 and WMP.No.31736 of 2026; writ of mandamus under Article 226 of the Constitution of India; Greater Chennai Corporation Commissioner and Assistant Engineer; construction violations; M/s Vignesh Homes Builders and Contractors; No.19 Appar Street, Kamakoti Nagar, Valasaravakkam, Chennai-600 087; Zone 11, Ward / Division 152; petitioner's counsel endorsement; no order as to cost; connected Miscellaneous Petition closed; Hemant Chandangoudar J.; dated 27.07.2026; no merits adjudication.

What did the court decide?

Permission to withdraw the writ petition granted; petition dismissed as withdrawn with no order as to cost; connected Miscellaneous Petition (WMP.No.31736 of 2026) closed. ¶¶20

M.K.Saimohan Vs The Commissioner — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2026)

¶1

W.P.No.28953 of 2026

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 27.07.2026

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR

¶5

W.P.No.28953 of 2026 a nd WMP.No.31736 of 2026

M.K.Saimohan

Petitioner(s)

Vs.

1.The Commissioner Greater Chennai Corporation, Rippon Building, Chennai 600 003.

¶10

2.Assistant Engineer Greater Chennai Corporation, Rippon Building, Chennai 600 003.

¶11

3.M/s Vignesh Homes Builders and Contractors, No 3/7 OHM Eswarar Street, Thirumali Nagar, Ramapuram, Chennai 600 089 Respondent(s)

¶12

Prayer: This Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the 1^st and 2^nd respondents to take action on the construction violations committed by the 3^rd respondent at No.19 Appar Street Kamakoti Nagar, Valasaravakkam, Chenani-600 087 (Zone 11, Ward / Division 152).

¶13

1/4

¶14

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

¶15

For Petitioner : Mr.M.Vijaya Kumar

¶16

W.P.No.28953 of 2026

¶17

For Respondent : Ms.S.Vanitha Joice Rani for R1 & R2 Standing Counsel

¶18

ORDER

¶19

When the matter is taken up for hearing, the learned counsel for the petitioner seeks permission of this Court to withdraw this Writ Petition and he has also made an endorsement in the petition to that effect.

¶20

2. In view of the submission and endorsement made by the learned counsel for petitioner, this Writ Petition is dismissed as withdrawn. There shall be no order as to cost. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.

¶21

27.07.2026

¶22

Index : Yes/No Speaking order : Yes/No dna

¶23

2/4

¶24

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

¶25

W.P.No.28953 of 2026

¶26

¶27

1.The Commissioner Greater Chennai Corporation, Rippon Building, Chennai 600 003.

¶28

2.The Assistant Engineer Greater Chennai Corporation, Rippon Building, Chennai 600 003.

¶29

3/4

¶30

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

¶31

W.P.No.28953 of 2026 HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR.J.,

¶32

dna

¶33

W.P.No.28953 of 2026 and WMP.No.31736 of 2026

¶34

27.07.2026

¶35

4/4

¶36

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

M.K.Saimohan v. The Commissioner

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M.K.Saimohan v. The Commissioner

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M.Yuvaraj Vs the Commissioner of Prohibition and Excise

V.Omalingam Vs the Deputy Commissioner (Excise)

T.Nagaraj Vs the Regional Transport Authority

Tvl.Indian Oil corporation Limited Vs The Assistant Commissioner of customs

E.Karthiresan Vs The Regional Transport officer and

G.Erusammal Vs The District Collector