S.Papp Ammal v. Chennai Metropolitan Development Authority

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 21-08-2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE N. MALA

1. S.Papp Ammal W/o.Chellamuthu, No.3 - 86 -1, East Street, Rayampuram, Ariyalur, 621 718.

Petitioner(s) Vs

1. Chennai Metropolitan Development Authority Rep. By Member Secretary No.8, Gandhi Irvin Road, Thalamuthu Natarajan Maligai, Egmore, Chennai 600 008.

Respondent(s) PRAYER Writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of a writ of mandamus directing the Respondent to consider the representation of petitioner dated 14/07/2025 for the allotment of extra space in front and backside of the petitioners shop No.T / G / P / 13 situated in Periyar vegetable market, Koyambedu Wholesale market complex, Koyambedu, Chennai 600 10 within the time limit prescribed by this Court.

For Petitioner(s):

M.Raja Sekhar D.Shaik Mohamed Yaser C.S.Nandha Kumar For Respondent:

Mr.R.Thamaraiselvan, Standing counsel

ORDER

(1)Mr.R.Thamaraiselvan, learned Standing Counsel accepts notice on behalf of the respondent. With the consent of the learned counsels on either side, the writ petition is taken up for final disposal at the admission stage itself. (2)The writ petition is filed for a mandamus to direct the respondent to consider the petitioner's representation dated 14.07.2025, within a time frame fixed by this Court.

(3)The petitioner purchased shop No.T/G/P/13 to an extent of 46.38 sq.ft., at the rate of Rs.3,578/- per square feet, by paying the entire sale consideration to the respondent. Pursuant to the purchase, the petitioner was also granted license, under Section 21 of the Tamil Nadu Specified Commodities Markets

[Regulation of Location] Act, 1996. The petitioner states that there is an extra space in the front and the backside of the petitioner's shop which is presently illegally occupied by certain persons who visit Tasmac shop located opposite to the Market. The petitioner further states that similarly placed persons were allotted the unused extra space by the respondent vide proceedings dated 10.07.2001. The petitioner therefore submitted a representation to the respondent on 14.07.2025, to allot the extra space in the front and backside of his shop. However, the petitioner's representation was not considered and therefore, the petitioner has filed the above writ petition for the aforesaid relief.

(4)Heard the learned counsels on either side and also perused the materials placed on record.

(5)Under the facts and circumstances of the case and considering the limited prayer in the writ petition, a direction is issued to the respondent to consider and pass orders on the petitioner's representation dated 14.07.2025, on merits and in accordance with law, within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

(6)The writ petition is disposed of with the above direction. No costs. 21-08-2025 AP Index:Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Internet:Yes To 1.Chennai Metropolitan Development Authority Rep. By Member Secretary No.8, Gandhi Irvin Road, Thalamuthu Natarajan Maligai, Egmore, Chennai 600 008.

N.MALA J.

AP 21-08-2025