S.P.Gopi v. The District Collector
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 25-03-2026
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE ABDUL QUDDHOSE S.P.Gopi Petitioner(s) Vs
1. The District Collector Tiruvannamalai District, Tiruvannamalai -606 601.
2.The Assistant Director (DTCP) District Town and Country Planning Office No.27, Manalurpet Road, Tiruvannamalai- 606 601.
3.The Commissioner Chengam Municipality Chengam, Tiruvannamalai District- 606 701.
4.The Tahsildar Chengam Taluk, Tiruvannamalai District.
5.The Superintendent of Police Tiruvannamalai District, Tiruvannamalai.
6.The Inspector of Police Chengam Police Station, Tiruvannamalai District.
7.S.Jawaharlal Respondent(s)
PRAYER Directing the 1st Respondent to consider and dispose of the petitioners representation dated 28.11.2025, and thereupon reject the layout approval application submitted by the 3rd respondent, and further directing the 1st and 2nd Respondents to conduct a joint Physical inspection of the subject site, verify the existence of the irrigation canal, the actual road widths, and the authenticity of the documents relied upon. For Petitioner(s):
Mr.R.Varun Vignesh For Respondent(s):
Ms.C.Meera Arumugam, AGP For R1,R2 and R4 Mr.S.J.Mohamed Sathik Govt.Advocate For R3 Mr.V.Meganathan Govt.Advocate For R5 and R6 R7 Notice dispensed with
ORDER
This writ petition has been filed to direct the first respondent to reject the layout approval application submitted by the 7th respondent pertaining to the property, morefully disclosed in the affidavit filed in support of this writ petition.
2.According to the petitioner, there exists an irrigation canal adjoining the property and therefore, the layout approval cannot be granted to the 7th respondent. According to the petitioner, despite the same, the 7th respondent has
been granted layout approval by the third respondent. The petitioner seeks for cancellation of the said layout approval. The petitioner had given a representation on 28.11.2025 for the said purpose. Since the said representation was not considered, the petitioner has filed this writ petition. 3.Ms.C.Meera Arumugam, learned Additional Government Pleader accepts notice on behalf of respondents 1, 2 and R4. Mr.S.J.Mohamed Sathik, learned Government Advocate accepts notice on behalf of the third respondent. Mr.V.Meganathan, learned Government Advocate accepts notice on behalf of respondents 5 and 6. Since no adverse order is being passed against the seventh respondent, notice to the seventh respondent is dispensed with by this Court. 4.No prejudice would be caused to the respondents if the petitioner's representation, as stated supra, is considered, on merits and in accordance with law, after hearing the objections of the 7th respondent, within a time frame to be fixed by this Court. This Court is not expressing any opinion on the merits of the petitioner's representation.
5.For the foregoing reasons, this writ petition is disposed of by directing the first respondent to pass final orders, on merits and in accordance with law on the petitioner's representation dated 28.11.2025 seeking for cancellation of the layout approval said to have been granted to the 7th respondent for the
property, morefully described in the affidavit filed in support of this petition, after hearing the objections of the seventh respondent and any other necessary party whom the first respondent deems it fit to enquire, within a period of 12 weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No costs. 25-03-2026 vga
To 1.The District Collector Tiruvannamalai District, Tiruvannamalai -606 601.
2.The Assistant Director (DTCP) District Town and Country Planning Office No.27, Manalurpet Road, Tiruvannamalai- 606 601.
3.The Commissioner Chengam Municipality Chengam, Tiruvannamalai District- 606 701.
4.The Tahsildar Chengam Taluk, Tiruvannamalai District.
5.The Superintendent of Police Tiruvannamalai District, Tiruvannamalai.
6.The Inspector of Police Chengam Police Station, Tiruvannamalai District.
ABDUL QUDDHOSE J.
vga 25-03-2026