K.Ravichandran v. The Commissioner

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 04.02.2025

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE J.SATHYA NARAYANA PRASAD K.Ravichandran

...Petitioner

-VsThe Commissioner, Corporation of Madras, Chennai - 600 003.

...Respondent

Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for the issuance of a direction in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondent to consider and pass orders on the petitioner representation dated 28.11.2024 and pass such further orders. For Petitioner :

Mr.C.Samadharama Arasu For Respondent :

Mr.A.Arunbabu Standing Counsel

O R D E R

Mr.A.Arunbabu, learned Standing Counsel takes notice on behalf of the respondent. With the consent of both parties, this writ petition is taken up for final disposal at the admission stage itself. 1/5

2. This writ petition has been filed to direct the respondent to consider the representation of the petitioner dated 28.11.2024.

3. The case of the Petitioner is that the petitioner purchased the property in the Shanthi apartment on the 8th floor from one Sureshkumar through the Registered Sale Deed on 19.01.1996 and its Document No.634 of 1996. The petitioner obtained an Encumbrance certificate for his property on 27.02.1996 and 30.06.1998 and also obtained a family card in the year 2015 in the said apartment. However, the said Sureshkumar is claiming ownership over the petitioner's property now.

4. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner applied for assessment of property tax, water tax, and underground drainage tax receipt in the petitioner's name before the respondent in respect of his property by application dated 28.11.2024. Even after receipt of the said application by the respondent, there has been no response and no orders have been passed by the respondent till date. Hence, the writ petition is filed.

2/5

5. Learned standing counsel appearing for the respondent would submit that the representation of the petitioner dated 28.11.2024 would be considered on merits, in accordance with law within a time frame stipulated by this Court.

6. Heard both sides and perused the materials available on record.

7. Without going into the merits of the case, the respondent is directed to consider the representation of the petitioner dated 28.11.2024 on merits, in accordance with law and pass appropriate orders within a period of eight (8) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. In the result, the writ petition stands disposed of with the above observations and direction. No costs.

04.02.2025 cda Index : Yes/No Speaking/Non Speaking order 3/5

J.SATHYA NARAYANA PRASAD, J.

cda To The Commissioner, Corporation of Madras, Chennai - 600 003.

04.02.2025 4/5

5/5