← Library
Madras High CourtWP/4960/2026disposed of

P.Papitha v. The Additional Principal Secretary

2026-02-13Honourable Ms. Justice P.T. Asha6 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

Dated : 13.02.2026

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE Ms. JUSTICE P.T. ASHA P.Papitha ...petitioner Vs.

1.The Additional Principal Secretary, Department of Housing and Urban Development St. George Fort, Chennai.

2.Tamilnadu Urban Habitat Development Board, Represented by the Managing Director No.5, Kamarajar Salai, Mylapore, Chennai - 5.

...respondents Prayer: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, directing the 1st respondent herein to consider the representation of the petitioner dated 26-04-2025 for allotment of tenement in the Pattinapakkam Scheme.

1/6

For petitioner :

Mr. R.Sivakumar For respondent 1 :

Mr. Yogesh Kannadasan Special Government Pleader For respondent 2 :

Mr. G.Venkatesan

O R D E R

This writ petition is filed for the following relief: "To direct the 1st respondent herein to consider the representation of the petitioner dated 26-04-2025 for allotment of tenement in the Pattinapakkam Scheme"

2. The case of the petitioner is that she belongs to a fisherman community and living near Marina beach area. The petitioner has no house in her name therefore, she had applied for a tenement before the 2nd respondent board. The 2nd respondent did not allot a tenement.

3. The petitioner sent several representations to the Prime Minister of India for allotment of house under House for All Scheme. The Prime Minister Office have sent a letter to the 2nd respondent to 2/6

consider her application for allotting a tenement. The petitioner would submit that she got an information from a local resident that he has received a reply to his RTI enquiry that out of 1188 tenements constructed in the Pattinapakkam scheme most of the tenements were not allotted to the local residents.

4. Therefore, the petitioner sent a representation to the 2nd respondent on 31.01.2024 and since there was no reply the petitioner has filed an application under RTI. In reply to the RTI also the 2nd respondent did not give any information about the action taken on her application for tenement.

5. Thereafter, on 25.04.2025, the petitioner has sent a representation to the 1st respondent who is a nodal authority for Housing for All Scheme, stating all the facts to allot a tenement in the Pattinapakkam scheme. However, the 1st respondent did not take any action on the representation. Hence, the present writ petition has been filed.

3/6

6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the fact that the petitioner's representation has not been considered to date, the 1st respondent is directed to consider the petitioner's representation and pass orders on merits and in accordance with law, within a period 3 weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

7. With the above direction, this writ petition is allowed. No costs.

13.02.2026 kan 4/6

To 1.The Additional Principal Secretary, Department of Housing and Urban Development St. George Fort, Chennai.

2.The Managing Director Tamilnadu Urban Habitat Development Board, No.5, Kamarajar Salai, Mylapore, Chennai - 5.

5/6

P.T. ASHA, J kan 13.02.2026 6/6