N.Shanmugham v. The Chennai Metropolitan Development Authority,
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 10.11.2023 CORAM :
THE HON'BLE MR.SANJAY V.GANGAPURWALA, CHIEF JUSTICE AND THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY N.Shanmugham .. Petitioner Vs 1 The Chennai Metropolitan Development Authority Rep. by its Member Secretary Thalamuthu Natarajan Building No.1 Gandhi Irwin Road Egmore Chennai - 8.
2 The Commissioner Corporation of Chennai Ripon Building, Chennai.
3 The Collector Chennai District.
4 The Tahsildar Ambattur Taluk Chennai - 53.
5 The Tamil Nadu Housing Board Rep. by its Managing Director Anna Salai, Chennai - 53.
6 The Government of Tamil Nadu Rep. by Secretary, Land Administration Ezhilagam Chepauk Chennai - 5.
7 N.Devarajan 8 Kupidisaatham Narayanasamy Educational Trust Rep. by its Founder Trustee Devarajan A.L.80, 4th Cross Street 11th Main Road Anna Nagar Chennai - 40.
9 The Assistant Commissioner 7th Zone Corporation Greater Chennai Ambattur, Chennai - 53.
.. Respondents Prayer: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking issuance of a writ of mandamus directing the 6th respondent to consider and pass orders on the representation dated 25.10.2016 seeking restoration of road in S.No.253/12 Padi Village. For the Petitioner : Mr.Nasser Hussain for M/s.N.A.Nissar Ahmed For the Respondents : Mr.Thamaraiselvan Standing Counsel for 1st respondent : Mr.Manibharathi Standing Counsel for respondents 2 and 9
: Mr.K.Karthik Jagannath Government Advocate for respondents 3, 4 and 6 : Mr.D.Veerasekaran Standing Counsel for 5th respondent : Mr.M.R.Jothimanian for 7th respondent : Mr.P.Kumaresan for 8th respondent
ORDER
(Order of the court was made by the Hon'ble Chief Justice) Heard Mr.Nasser Hussain, learned counsel for the petitioner; Mr.Thamaraiselvan, learned Standing Counsel for the first respondent; Mr.Manibharathi, learned Standing Counsel for respondents 2 and 9; Mr.K.Karthik Jagannath, learned Government Advocate for respondents 3, 4 and 6; Mr.D.Veerasekaran, learned Standing Counsel for the fifth respondent; Mr.M.R.Jothimanian, learned counsel for the seventh respondent; and Mr.P.Kumaresan, learned counsel for the eighth respondent.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that Survey No.253/12 is a road. The school has encroached upon the road. According to learned counsel for the petitioner, though the school is said to be situated in Survey No.253/11, the respondent authorities have not considered that the school has encroached upon the road forming part of Survey No.253/12.
3. An affidavit is filed by the Tamil Nadu Housing Board to suggest that the school is located in Survey No.253/11 Part and has not encroached upon the road in Sruvey No.253/12. The Tamil Nadu Housing Board may not have any mala fide intention.
4. It is for the Corporation to oversee that the roads are properly maintained and no encroachment is caused upon the road. The Corporation may survey the property. If the Corporation finds any encroachment on road, then action may be taken in accordance with law.
The writ petition is disposed of accordingly. There will be no order as to costs.
(S.V.G., CJ.) (D.B.C., J.) 10.11.2023 Index :
Yes/No Yes/No sasi
To:
1 The Member Secretary Chennai Metropolitan Development Authority Thalamuthu Natarajan Building No.1 Gandhi Irwin Road Egmore Chennai - 8.
2 The Commissioner Corporation of Chennai Ripon Building, Chennai.
3 The Collector Chennai District.
4 The Tahsildar Ambattur Taluk Chennai - 53.
5 The Managing Director Tamil Nadu Housing Board Anna Salai, Chennai - 53.
6 The Secretary, Land Administration Government of Tamil Nadu Ezhilagam Chepauk Chennai - 5.
7 The Assistant Commissioner 7th Zone Corporation Greater Chennai Ambattur, Chennai - 53.
THE HON'BLE CHIEF JUSTICE AND D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY,J.
(sasi) 10.11.2023