← Library
Madras High CourtWP/23013/2022disposed of

Venkata Krishnan Subramani v. The Commissioner

2025-07-28Honourable Mr Justice M. Sundar,Honourable Mr.Justice Hemant Chandangoudar10 pages

2025:MHC:1853

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 28-07-2025

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M. SUNDAR AND THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR WP No.23013 of 2022 Venkata Krishnan Subramani S/o.R.S.Mani ..Petitioner Vs 1.

The Commissioner Corporation of Chennai Rippon Buildings, Park Town Chennai-600 003.

2.

The Zonal Officer Old Zone No.X, New Zone No.XIII Corporation of Chennai Kasthurba Nagar Adyar, Chennai-600 020.

3.

The Junior Engineer Old Division No.153, New Division No.179 Corporation of Chennai Velachery Main Road Velachery, Chennai-600 042.

Page Nos.1/10

4.

Dr.R.Elangovan No.1, 1st Main Road Kamaraj Nagar (West) Thiruvanmiyur Chennai-600 041.

... Respondents Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking a writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents 1 to 3 herein to comply with the notice dated 01.02.2022 so as to remove the encroachment on the 30 feet Bhuvaneshwari Nagar Extension Road, presently known as Greater Chenani Corporation Street, comprised in Survey No.34, Block No.193, mentioned in the Town Survey Land Register, corresponding Old Survey No.317/1A2A2A1A1A1A1A1A, PT, and lay a permanent road thereon, within a time.

For Petitioner:

Mr.R.Ramkumar for Ms.Malini George For Respondents:

Mr.A.Arun Babu Standing Counsel, for R1 to R3 Mr.K.S.Vaithiyanathan, for R4

ORDER

(Order of the Court was made by M.Sundar J.) Mr.R.Ramkumar, learned counsel representing Ms.Malini George, counsel on record for writ petitioner, Mr.A.Arun Babu, learned Standing Counsel for official respondents (R1 to R3) and Mr.K.S.Vaithiyanathan, learned counsel for private respondent (R4) are before us. Page Nos.2/10

2. Learned counsel for writ petitioner submits that a 'communication dated 01.02.2022 bearing reference Ma.A.13.Na.Ka.No.6399/2021 from the Assistant Engineer of GCC to R4' {hereinafter 'said communication' for the sake of brevity, convenience and clarity} is sought to be enforced. 3.In and vide said communication, GCC has alleged that R4 has committed encroachment to an extent of 795 sq.m in S.No.193/34 situate at V.G.P.Selva Nagar, 2nd Main Road, Division 179, Part 39, Zone-13. This S.No.193/34 shall be referred to as 'said land' for the sake of brevity, convenience and clarity.

4. From the submissions made before this Court, it comes to light that there is no disputation or disagreement that R4 and his spouse have filed a civil suit in C.S.No.67 of 2022 arraying State i.e., District Revenue Officer, Revenue officials, GCC and private individuals as defendants. To be noted, the writ petitioner before us is D9 in the said suit. The suit has been filed with prayers for declaration of title, consequential injunction and declaration qua communications issued by the revenue authorities and GCC. One of the limbs of prayer seeks a declaration that said communication which is the fulcrum of the captioned main writ petition is null and void. Page Nos.3/10

This suit is in an advanced stage and an interim order granted in a intraCourt appeal [O.S.A.No.267 of 2022 and C.M.P.No.17194 of 2022 thereat] is operating.

5.We also find that D7 and D8 in the suit (C.Prabhu and C.Ramesh) have earlier come to this Court vide W.P.No.27210 of 2021 arraying R4 before us as R6 along with other official respondents and this writ petition was disposed of by another Hon'ble Division Bench vide an order dated 20.06.2023 and a scanned reproduction of the same is as follows: Page Nos.4/10

Page Nos.5/10

Page Nos.6/10

Page Nos.7/10

6. There is unanimity as amongst all learned counsel before us that the parties will now have to stand bound by the decree in the aforementioned suit subject of course to further appeal, if any.

7. In this view of the matter, considering the facts and circumstances of the case and nature of the matter, we are of the considered view that the mandamus prayer qua said communication should yield to the verdict in the suit. This by itself is sufficient to give a closure to the captioned writ petition. Though obvious, we make it clear that we have not expressed any view or opinion one way or the other regarding said communication or any other aspect of the matter as all questions are left open to be decided in the afore-referred suit.

8. We note that the suit is before Hon'ble single Judge. We request Hon'ble single Judge to proceed with the suit on its own merits and in accordance with law untrammeled by this Court. Page Nos.8/10

Captioned Writ Petition is disposed of as closed in the aforesaid manner. There shall be no order as to costs. (M.S.,J.) (H.C.,J.) 28-07-2025 Index : Yes / No Speaking / Non-speaking order mk To 1.

The Commissioner Corporation of Chennai Rippon Buildings, Park Town Chennai-600 003.

2.

The Zonal Officer Old Zone No.X, New Zone No.XIII Corporation of Chennai Kasthurba Nagar Adyar, Chennai-600 020.

3.

The Junior Engineer Old Division No.153, New Division No.179 Corporation of Chennai Velachery Main Road Velachery, Chennai-600 042.

Page Nos.9/10

M.SUNDAR, J.

AND HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR, J.

mk WP No. 23013 of 2022 28-07-2025 Page Nos.10/10