Anees Babu v. Principal Secretary To The Government
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 24.04.2025
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM AND THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.RAJASEKAR W.P.No.14573 of 2025 1.Anees Babu 2.Uneen Kutty K.
3.Nasser 4.Shihabudheen Kozhiparamban 5.Abdurasheed Musarikandy 6.M/s.Woodbrook Developers LLP, Represented by its Managing Partner Muhammed Ashik K.
... Petitioners (Petitioners 2 to 6 were represented by Power of Attorney i.e., 1st Petitioner herein) Vs.
1.
Principal Secretary to the Government, Housing and Urban Development, Secretariat, Fort St.George, Chennai - 600 009.
The Executive Officer, Naduvattam Town Panchayat, Naduvattam, Nilgiris.
Assistant Director, District Urban Development and Planning Department, Collectorate Complex, Nilgiris.
... Respondents
Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India, seeking for an issuance of writ of mandamus, directing the 2nd respondent to consider the petitioners representation dated 27.01.2025 to grant further time of 6 months for the completion of construction work in compliance with the approval.
For Petitioners : Mr.Akhil Akbar Ali For Respondents : Mr.E.Veda Bagath Singh Special Government Pleader for R1 & R3 : Mr.P.Harish Government Advocate for R2
ORDER
(Order of the Court was made by S.M.SUBRAMANIAM, J.) The writ of mandamus has been instituted to direct the second respondent to consider the petitioners representation dated 27.01.2025 to grant further time of 6 months for the completion of construction work in compliance with the approval.
Granting extension of time for completing the alteration work is a concession which is to be granted by considering various mitigating factors. Extension of time cannot be claimed as an absolute right. It is for the Authorities to conduct filed inspection and take a decision. However, no such
writ petition is entertainable. By merely seeking a direction to dispose of the representation, the orders of the Courts are abused on several occasions. Even for seeking such a relief, person approaching the Court must establish his/her right. Mechanical issuance of direction would do no service to the cause of justice. The litigant will be back again and make an attempt to prolong and protract the issues thereby gaining time to achieve their goal by extending the time. Such an attitude or practice at no circumstances be encouraged by the Courts.
In the present case, the petitioners were very much aware about the time limit granted for completing the alteration work. They are expected to complete the same. In the event of any mitigating circumstances, the same is to be explained only before the authorities and therefore, the writ petition per se is not entertainable and thus stands dismissed. No costs. [S.M.S,J.] [K.R.S,J.] 24.04.2025 (2/2) veda Index:Yes/No Speaking order/Non-speaking order
To 1.
Principal Secretary to the Government, Housing and Urban Development, Secretariat, Fort St.George, Chennai - 600 009.
The Executive Officer, Naduvattam Town Panchayat, Naduvattam, Nilgiris.
Assistant Director, District Urban Development and Planning Department, Collectorate Complex, Nilgiris.
S.M.SUBRAMANIAM,J.
AND K.RAJASEKAR,J.
veda W.P.No.14573 of 2025 24.04.2025 (2/2)