← Library
Madras High CourtWP/26546/2019disposed of

P.Muralikrishnan v. The State Of Tamil Nadu

2024-01-29Honourable The Chief Justice,Honourable Mr Justice D.Bharatha Chakravarthy6 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 29.01.2024 CORAM :

THE HON'BLE MR.SANJAY V.GANGAPURWALA, CHIEF JUSTICE AND THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY P.Muralikrishnan .. Petitioner vs 1.The State of Tamil Nadu, rep. by its Secretary, Housing and Urban Development Department, Fort St. George, Chennai-600 009.

2.The Commissioner, Greater Chennai Corporation, Chennai-600 003.

3.The Member Secretary, Chennai Metropolitan Development Authority, Egmore, Chennai-600 008.

4.The Executive Engineer (Enforcement), Zone-X, Greater Chennai Corporation, No.117, N.S.K. Salai, Kodambakkam, Chennai-600 024.

5.Ganga Bai .. Respondents

Prayer : Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking issuance of a writ of mandamus directing the respondents 1 to 4 particularly the 2nd and 4th respondents to take further action against the 5th respondent for construction of the building without permission at Door No.2/14, 6th Street, Jai Nagar, Arumbakkam, Chennai-600 106 in pursuant to the fourth respondent's letter dated 27.6.2019 vide reference Letter No.10/00105/2019 sent on the basis of the petitioner's representations dated 19.02.2018 and 23.03.2018.

For the Petitioner : No appearance For the Respondents : Mr.T.K.Saravanan Government Advocate for respondent No.1 : Mr.E.C.Ramesh Standing Counsel for respondents 2 and 4 : Mrs.P.Veena Suresh Standing Counsel for respondent No.3 : Mr.T.S.Raj Mohan for respondent No.5

ORDER

(Order of the court was made by the Hon'ble Chief Justice) None appears for the petitioner when the matter is called out.

2. Heard Mr.T.K.Saravanan, learned Government Advocate for respondent No.1; Mr.E.C.Ramesh, learned Standing Counsel for respondents 2 and 4; Mrs.P.Veena Suresh, learned Standing Counsel for respondent No.3; and, Mr.T.S.Raj Mohan, learned counsel for respondent No.5.

3. On 22.11.2023, none appeared for the petitioner. We had adjourned the matter to 29.01.2024. Today also none appears for the petitioner.

4. It is submitted by learned counsel for the fifth respondent that regularization application has been given.

5. It is for the authorities to take steps in accordance with law.

6. Learned counsel for the Corporation submits that further action in accordance with law would be undertaken expeditiously.

7. In view of the above, the writ petition stands disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.

(S.V.G., CJ.) (D.B.C., J.) 29.01.2024 Index :

Yes/No Yes/No bbr

To 1.The Secretary, State of Tamil Nadu, Housing and Urban Development Department, Fort St. George, Chennai-600 009.

2.The Commissioner, Greater Chennai Corporation, Chennai-600 003.

3.The Member Secretary, Chennai Metropolitan Development Authority, Egmore, Chennai-600 008.

4.The Executive Engineer (Enforcement), Zone-X, Greater Chennai Corporation, No.117, N.S.K. Salai, Kodambakkam, Chennai-600 024.

THE HON'BLE CHIEF JUSTICE AND D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY,J.

bbr 29.01.2024