Kavitha v. The Commissioner

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 22-01-2026

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE V. LAKSHMINARAYANAN Kavitha W/o.Murugan ..Petitioner Vs

1. The Commissioner, Greater Chennai Corporation, Ripon Building, Chennai.

2. The Superintending Engineer, Bus Route Roads Department, Greater Chennai corporation, Ripon Building, Chennai- 600 003.

..Respondents Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India praying for issuance of Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records of the 2nd Respondent dated 18.12.2025 in Pe.Sa.Thu.Na.Ka.No. 1312/ 2025-6 and quash the same as arbitrary and illegal and in consequence thereof direct the respondents to permit the petitioner to complete the pending works in pursuance of the tender notice dated 23.04.2025. For Petitioners:

Ms.Athiniveda For Respondent(s):

Mr. E.C. Ramesh Standing Counsel Takes Notice For Respondents. __________Page 1 of 8

ORDER

This Writ Petition has been filed challenging the order of the 2nd Respondent dated 18.12.2025 in Pe.Sa.Thu.Na.Ka.No. 1312/ 2025-6 and to quash the same, and further direct the respondents to permit the petitioner to complete the pending works in pursuance of the tender notice dated 23.04.2025.

2. The petitioner is a road contractor. She had been benefited with the contract for laying roads in Ward No. 6, 8, 13, 14 and 15.. The total number of works allotted to the petitioner was 301. Out Of 301, the petitioner claims that she has completed 230, whereas the corporation has been generous enough to say that the petitioner has completed 237.

3.The petitioner states that during the course of execution of the work, as many as 21 roads could not be laid on account of the fact that Chennai Metropolitan Water Supply and Sewerage Board (CMWSSB) had taken up development activities. CMWSSB had occupied the roads to lay pipeline and hence, the petitioner could not perform her contractual duties. The Petitioner states that by virtue of the impugned order, the remaining works had been cancelled and hence, she is before this court. __________Page 2 of 8

4. Taking into consideration that the petitioner has completed the major portion of work assigned to her, I called upon Mr. E.C.Ramesh to get instructions if the Corporation will be willing to accommodate the petitioner and grant her time to complete the remaining work.

5. Mr.E.C.Ramesh has been instructed by the Superintending Engineer, Bus Route Roads Department, Greater Chennai Corporation, to the following effect, with respect to total number of road works which are yet to be completed:

S.No.

DESCRIPTION OF WORKS TOTAL NUMBERS 01.

Total Number of Road Works 02.

Number of Work front available and not taken up by the contractor 03.

Number of works completed 04.

Number of works in progress 05.

Number of Road works dropped (Due to road cut) 06.

Work front not available due to road cut/restoration work

6. He was also instructed to say that if the petitioner completes the work within one month, the Corporation officials are willing to co-operate with the petitioner towards completion of the remaining work. Ms.Athiniveda readily __________Page 3 of 8

agreed to this generous offer and agreed to file an undertaking affidavit. In order to enable Ms.Athiniveda to file an undertaking, I posted the matter today.

7. Ms.Athiniveda has filed an affidavit of the writ petitioner which is scanned and extracted hereunder:

__________Page 4 of 8

__________Page 5 of 8

7. A perusal of Paragraph 5 shows that the petitioner has undertaken to complete the remaining 40 works within a period of one month from 21.01.2026. As the undertaking affidavit complies with the requirements of the Corporation, this Writ petition is disposed of granting time to the petitioner to complete the 40 works within the period undertaken by her. The respondent shall ensure complete Cooperation for the completion of the said work. It is made clear that in case the remaining 40 works are not completed, the impugned order shall stand revived. No costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous petitions are closed.

22-01-2026 Index: Yes/NoSpeaking/Non-speaking order arr __________Page 6 of 8

To

1. The Commissioner, Greater Chennai corporation, Ripon Building, Chennai.

2. The Superintending Engineer, Bus Route Roads Department, Greater Chennai corporation, Ripon Building, Chennai- 600 003. __________Page 7 of 8

V.LAKSHMINARAYANAN, J.

arr W.P No. 350 of 2026 22-01-2026 __________Page 8 of 8

__________Page 9 of 8