M/S.Sekar Emporium (Textiles) Pvt Ltd., v. The District Collector

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 22.10.2025 CORAM :

THE HONOURABLE MR. MANINDRA MOHAN SHRIVASTAVA, CHIEF JUSTICE AND THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.ARUL MURUGAN & W.M.P.Nos.43663 & 36485 of 2025 M/s. Sekar Emporium (Textiles) Pvt Ltd Rep. by its Managing Director C.Murugan, S/o. Late S.Chandrasekaran Having its registered office at New Door No.39 (Old No.22) Arcot Road Kodambakkam, Chennai 600 024.

..

Petitioner Vs.

1. The District Collector Chennai District.

2. The Revenue Divisional Officer Chennai Central, Chennai.

3. The Tahsildar Egmore Taluk, Chennai 600 078.

4. The Member Secretary Chennai Metropolitan Development Authority Thalamuthu Natrajan Building Gandhi Irwin Road, Egmore Chennai 600 008.

5. The Government of Tamil Nadu Rep. by its Additional Secretary Housing and Urban Development Authority Secretariat, Fort St. George Chennai 600 009.

6. Uma Ganesan ..

Respondents Prayer : Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking a writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records on the file of the impugned order passed by 4th respondent in Notice No. EC/C-II/6785/2024 dated 22.07.2025 and consequently directing the Respondents 2 and 3 herein to survey the land and issue corrected patta and FMB sketch as per site in respect of the property bearing Door No, 22, Arcot Road, Kodambakkam, Chennai 600 024 comprised in T.S.No.2 part. Block No.32, Nos. 21, 25, 28 in No.109 Puliyur Village, Egmore-Nungambakkam Taluk measuring an extent of 6568 sq. feet pursuant to my application dated 10.01.2024 and quash the same.

For Petitioner : Mr.Vijay Shankar For Mr.K.S.Saravanan For Respondents : Mr.K.Karthik Jegannath Government Advocate for R1 to R3 & R5 Mrs.P.Veena Suresh Standing Counsel for R4 Mr.T.Thiageswaran For M/s. Warran & Sai Rams for R6

ORDER

(Order of the Court was made by the Hon'ble Chief Justice) Heard. The grievance, as ventilated through this petition, is that without deciding petitioner's application for grant of patta for additional land, the authorities have proceeded to issue impugned notice directing demolition, followed by lock and seal.

2. Learned State counsel as well as counsel for sixth respondent bring to the notice of this Court the observations made by the Division Bench in the order dated 23.06.2025 in W.A.No.416 of 2025.

3. In the aforesaid order, the Division Bench of this Court has observed thus:

"Pursuant to the application/grievance filed by the appellant before the authorities, R6 has, on 12.09.2024, granted the petitioner two months' time to obtain a revised patta as a final opportunity. Needless to say, the issuance of patta will be subject to the decision to be taken by the civil court in the pending suit and in our view, the application for

issuance of patta is pre-mature and the present proceedings are misconceived."

4. Though learned counsel for petitioner would submit that observations made therein do not, in terms, restrain the respondents from considering the application for grant of patta for additional adjoining land, learned State counsel would state that in view of the observations made in the same line that the application for issuance of patta is pre-mature and the proceedings are misconceived, the authorities are unable to proceed to consider the application for grant of patta for additional land.

5. The order passed by the Division Bench, in the aforesaid case, uses both expressions. It says "needless to say, the issuance of patta will be subject to the decision to be taken by the civil Court in the pending suit" and also proceeds to observe "in our view, the application for issuance of patta is pre-mature and the present proceedings are misconceived".

6. In the above said conspectus, any clarification/modification could be granted only by the concerned Bench which has decided the matter. Therefore, we are not inclined to grant any relief as claimed in this petition, but leave petitioner to seek remedy of clarification/modification of the order dated 23.06.2025.

7. Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, the interim applications are closed. (MANINDRA MOHAN SHRIVASTAVA, CJ) (G.ARUL MURUGAN,J) 22.10.2025 Index :

Yes/No Yes/No kpl To

1. The District Collector Chennai District.

2. The Revenue Divisional Officer Chennai Central

Chennai.

3. The Tahsildar Egmore Taluk Chennai 600 078.

4. The Member Secretary Chennai Metropolitan Development Authority Thalamuthu Natrajan Building Gandhi Irwin Road, Egmore Chennai 600 008.

5. The Additional Secretary Housing and Urban Development Authority Secretariat, Fort St. George Chennai 600 009.

THE HON'BLE CHIEF JUSTICE AND G.ARUL MURUGAN,J.

(kpl) 22.10.2025