Disposed¶32

Mathava Ganesan, v. The Commissioner

Madras HC24 Mar 2026WP(MD)/32510/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Unauthorised construction; building plan approval; tenant no right to construct on another's property; direction to demolish; four-month compliance period; lock and seal notice 08.10.2025; Writ of Mandamus Article 226; Tamil Nadu District Municipalities Act 1920; Tamil Nadu Building Rules; Tamilnadu Urban Local Bodies Act 1998; Aruppukottai Corporation; Aruppukkottai; Madurai Bench Madras High Court; disposed; no costs.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the first respondent to proceed in accordance with law against the unauthorised construction, including demolition if there is violation of building plan approval, within four months from receipt of a copy of the order; writ petition disposed of with no order as to costs and the connected miscellaneous petition closed. ¶32

Mathava Ganesan, Vs The Commissioner — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶32

Issue for consideration

Whether the first respondent should be directed to remove the illegal/unauthorised construction put up by the third respondent. +1 more

¶21

Court's answer

If there is any violation with regard to building plan approval, the first respondent shall proceed in accordance with law, including demolition of the unauthorised construction, within a period of four months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶28

Ratio / Principle

The third respondent, being only a tenant, does not have any right to put up construction on the property belonging to another.

¶28

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, W.P(MD)No.32510 of 2025, decided 24.03.2026 (N.SATHISH KUMAR, J., author; M.JOTHIRAMAN, J.). The petitioner sought a Writ of Mandamus under Article 226 of the Constitution of India directing the Commissioner, Aruppukottai Corporation (R1) to remove the construction put up by the third respondent at Town Survey No.86, Block-3, Ward-D, S.B.K.High School Road, Aruppukottai, alleged to be unauthorised for want of building plan approval under the Tamil Nadu District Municipalities Act, 1920, the Tamil Nadu Building Rules and the Tamilnadu Urban Local Bodies Act 1998. R1 reported that a lock and seal notice had already been issued on 08.10.2025; the third respondent admitted tenancy under the second respondent (Aruppukkottai Nadargal Pothu Uravinmurai Abhiviruthi Trust) and proposed to regularise the construction. Held: a tenant has no right to put up construction on property belonging to another; where building plan approval is violated, R1 shall proceed in accordance with law, including demolition, within four months of receipt of a copy of the order. Petition disposed of; no costs; connected W.M.P(MD)No.25654 of 2025 closed.

¶1

W.P(MD)No.32510 of 2025

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED : 24.03.2026

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.SATHISH KUMAR and THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.JOTHIRAMAN

¶6

W.P(MD)No.32510 of 2025 and

¶7

W.M.P(MD)No.25654 of 2025

¶8

Thiru.Mathava Ganesan

¶9

... Petitioner

¶10

vs.

¶11

1.The Commissioner, Aruppukottai Corporation, Aruppukkottai, Virudhunagar District.

¶12

2.Aruppukkottai Nadargal Pothu Uravinmurai Abhiviruthi Trust, Through its Secretary, Aruppukkottai Town and Taluk, Virudhunagar District.

¶13

3.V.Vignesh Kanna ... Respondents

¶14

1/5

¶15

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

¶16

W.P(MD)No.32510 of 2025

¶17

PRAYER : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, to direct the first respondent to remove the illegal/unauthorized construction put up by the third respondent without following the procedure contemplated under the Tamil Nadu District Municipalities Act, 1920 and the Tamil Nadu Building Rules and Tamilnadu Urban Local Bodies Act 1998 in Town Survey No.86, Block-3, Ward-D, S.B.K.High School Road, Aruppukottai, Virudhunagar District.

¶18

For Petitioner	: Mr.V.R.Shanmuganathan
For R1	: Mr.N.Dilip Kumar
	Standing Counsel
For R2	: Mr.R.Parthasarathy
For R3	: Mr.M.Jothi Basu

¶19

ORDER

¶20

( Order of the Court was made by N.SATHISH KUMAR, J. )

¶21

The petitioner has filed the present Writ Petition seeking a direction to the first respondent to remove the illegal/unauthorised construction put up by the third respondent.

¶22

2/5

¶23

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

¶24

W.P(MD)No.32510 of 2025

¶25

2.It is the contention of the petitioner that the third respondent

¶26

has constructed the building without obtaining building plan approval and, therefore, seeks a direction to remove the unauthorised construction.

¶27

The learned counsel appearing for the first respondent submitted that a lock and seal notice had already been issued on 08.10.2025. The third respondent admitted that he is a tenant under the second respondent. According to him, he has put up the construction and proposes to take steps to regularise the same.

¶28

The third respondent, being only a tenant, does not have any right to put up construction on the property belonging to another. If there is any violation with regard to building plan approval, the first respondent shall proceed in accordance with law, including demolition of the unauthorised construction, within a period of four months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶29

3/5

¶30

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

¶31

W.P(MD)No.32510 of 2025

¶32

With the above directions, this Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

¶33

[N.S.K.,J.] [M.J.R.,J.] 24.03.2026

¶34

NCC : Yes / No Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes am

¶35

¶36