K1676 Uppilipalayam Mills v. The Commissioner

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 03.09.2025

CORAM:

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M. SUNDAR AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MUMMINENI SUDHEER KUMAR W.P.No.33701 of 2025 and W.M.P. Nos.37812 and 37814 of 2025 K 1676, Uppilipalayam Mills Industrial Workers Cooperative House Construction Society Ltd.

represented by its Secretary Uppilipalayam Post Coimbatore 641 015 Petitioner vs.

1.

The Commissioner Corporation of Coimbatore Coimbatore The Assistant Commissioner East Zone Coimbatore Corporation Coimbatore The Assistant Town Planning Officer East Zone Coimbatore Corporation Coimbatore Respondents 1/6

Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking a writ of certiorari calling for the records of the letter in Na.Ka.4277/2025/H-2 (Ki) dated 26.08.2025 on the file of the second respondent and quash the same.

For petitioner Mr. M.S. Palaniswamy For respondents Mr. G. Vinoth for Mr. N. Umapathi

ORDER

(made by M. SUNDAR, J.) Captioned main 'writ petition' [hereinafter 'WP' for the sake of brevity] has been filed with a prayer seeking issue of a writ of certiorari assailing a notice dated 26.08.2025 bearing reference Na.Ka.4277/2025/H-2 (Ki) issued by second respondent (Assistant Commissioner, East Zone, Coimbatore Corporation) which shall hereinafter be referred to as 'impugned notice' for the sake of convenience and clarity. Scanned reproduction of the impugned notice, as placed before us, is as follows:

2/6

3/6

Mr. M.S. Palaniswamy, learned counsel on record for writ petitioner, adverting to the impugned notice, submits that the same was served on the writ petitioner only on 28.08.2025 and learned counsel also submits that the impugned notice has been issued by second respondent without jurisdiction.

Issue notice to respondents.

4.

Mr. G. Vinoth, learned counsel representing Mr.N.Umapathi, learned Standing Counsel for respondents/Corporation, who is present in Court, accepts notice for all three respondents and very fairly submits, on instructions, that there will be a roll back of the impugned notice as second respondent does not have jurisdiction in the light of there being no delegation of powers under Section 128 of 'the Tamil Nadu Urban Local Bodies Act, 1998 (Tamil Nadu Act 9 of 1999)' [hereinafter 'the TNULB Act' for the sake of brevity, convenience and clarity] by first respondent to second respondent.

5.

We place on record our appreciation for the fair stand taken by learned Standing Counsel for Coimbatore Corporation and efface the impugned notice on this short point. We make it clear 4/6

that it is open to first respondent to issue a show cause notice (SCN) afresh in accordance with Section 128 of the TNULB Act, if so advised and if so desired.

6.

Though obvious, we make it clear that the impugned notice has been effaced (quashed) solely on the jurisdiction point i.e., as second respondent does not have jurisdiction qua Section 128 of TNULB Act and this means that we have not expressed any opinion or view on the merits of the matter.

7.

All questions are left open for both sides, if a fresh SCN is issued by first respondent.

8.

Captioned main WP stands allowed, albeit with preservation of rights and contentions of both sides in the aforesaid manner and observations, as above. Consequently, captioned writ miscellaneous petitions thereat have become otiose and the same are disposed of as closed. There shall be no orders as to costs. (M.S., J.) (M.S.K., J.) 03.09.2025 cad 5/6

M. SUNDAR, J.

and MUMMINENI SUDHEER KUMAR, J.

cad To 1.

The Commissioner Corporation of Coimbatore Coimbatore The Assistant Commissioner East Zone Coimbatore Corporation Coimbatore The Assistant Town Planning Officer East Zone Coimbatore Corporation Coimbatore 03.09.2025 6/6