M.Muthu Ganesan v. The Additional Chief Secretary Cum Deputy Chairman

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 20.08.2025

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR.MANINDRA MOHAN SHRIVASTAVA, CHIEF JUSTICE AND THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SUNDER MOHAN M.Muthu Ganesan : Petitioner versus 1.The Additional Chief Secretary Cum Deputy Chairman Chennai Metropolitan Development Authority, Tamil Nadu Housing Board Department, Chief Secretariat, Chennai- 09.

2.The Member Secretary (MS) Chennai Metropolitan Development Authority, Thalumuthu Natesan Maligai, No.1, Gandhi Erwin Road, Egmore, Chennai-600008 3.The Chief Executive Officer Chennai Metropolitan Development Authority, Thalumuthu Natesan Maligai, No.1, Gandhi Erwin Road, Egmore, Chennai-600 008.

4.The Chief Administrative Officer No.25, Kamarajapuram Main Road, Kamarajapuram, Chennai-600073.

5.G.D.Rajasekaran Respondents Prayer: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus directing the 2nd respondent to take expedite action on the letter No.10241213/Na.V3 (1)/ 2025-1 dated 28.04.2025 issued by the first respondent on the petitioner's representation dated 15.04.2025 within a stipulated period. For Petitioner(s):

Mr.M.Selvam For Respondent(s):Mr.M.Habeeb Rahman Government Advocate, For the first respondent M/s.P.Veena Suresh Standing Counsel For respondents 2 to 4

ORDER

(Order of the Court was made by the Hon'ble Chief Justice) This public interest litigation seeks cancellation of allotment of shop made in favour of the fifth respondent, on the allegation that the allotment has been made illegally.

2. We find that the petitioner himself was a claimant for allotment of shop but he was not granted any such allotment. Therefore, in these circumstances, the petitioner appears to be personally interested and could not come in pro bono capacity.

3. Therefore, we are not inclined to examine the correctness of allegations at the instance of the petitioner. It is well settled that under the garb of public interest litigation, the august forum of this court cannot be allowed to raise personal grievances. Nevertheless when a complaint has been made, the authority should examine the veracity of the complaint.

4. Subject to the aforesaid observation, we are not inclined to pass any order in the writ petition and the petition is accordingly dismissed. There will be no order as to costs. (MANINDRA MOHAN SHRIVASTAVA, CJ.) (SUNDER MOHAN, J.) 20.08.2025 Index : Yes/No : Yes/No tar

To 1.The Additional Chief Secretary Cum Deputy Chairman Chennai Metropolitan Development Authority, Tamil Nadu Housing Board Department, Chief Secretariat, Chennai- 09.

2.The Member Secretary (MS) Chennai Metropolitan Development Authority, Thalumuthu Natesan Maligai, No.1, Gandhi Erwin Road, Egmore, Chennai-600008 3.The Chief Executive Officer Chennai Metropolitan Development Authority, Thalumuthu Natesan Maligai, No.1, Gandhi Erwin Road, Egmore, Chennai-600 008.

4.The Chief Administrative Officer No.25, Kamarajapuram Main Road, Kamarajapuram, Chennai-600073.

THE HON'BLE CHIEF JUSTICE AND SUNDER MOHAN , J.

(tar) 20.08.2025