Sathappan v. The District Collector
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 24.11.2025
CORAM:
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M. DHANDAPANI
1. SATHAPPAN 2.Kalaivani Sathappan Petitioner(s) Vs
1. The District Collector Collectorate Campus, Vandavasi Road, Kanchipuram 631 501 2.The Revenue Divisional Officer Pattanoolchathram, Sriperumbudur Kanchipuram 602105 3.The Tahsildar Kundrathur Taluk Mehta Nagar Main Road, Chennai 69 4.The Panchayat Chairman Gerugambakkam Main Road, Kolapakkam Chennai 128 Respondent(s) Prayer : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue Writ of Mandamus, to direct the 2nd respondent to consider the letter vide No. COLKPM 1263/ 2025/ U2 dated 17.03.2025 issued by the 1st 1/5
respondent and further direct the 2nd and 3rd respondents to consider the representation dated 4.11.2025.
For petitioner : Ms. Rekha Sivakumar For respondents : Mr.M. Rajendran Addl. Govt. Pleader
ORDER
Mr. M. Rajendran, learned Additional Government Pleader, takes notice for respondents. By consent of both the parties, this writ petition is taken up for final disposal at the admission stage itself.
2. This writ petition has been filed seeking for a direction to the 2nd respondent to consider the letter vide No. COLKPM 1263/ 2025/ U2 dated 17.03.2025 issued by the 1st respondent and further direct the 2nd and 3rd respondents to consider the petitioners' representation dated 4.11.2025.
3. It is stated that petitioner claims to be the absolute owners and possession of their property having an extent of 1110 sq. ft. in New Survey No.19/6A & 20/A of Kolapakkam Village, Kundrathur Taluk, Kancheepuram District. . According to the petitioners, a tree situated on the side of the public road, adjacent to their compound wall, causes a serious risk to their property, as the branches are likely to fall during heavy storms and will cause substantial 2/5
damage. Under such circumstances, petitioners jointly submitted a representation to the respondents requesting removal of the said tree. Pursuant thereto, the 1st respondent directed the 2nd respondent to take necessary action. However, no further action has been taken till date. Hence, this writ petition has been filed with the aforesaid prayer.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted his arguments by showing the photographs of the subject tree as well as reiterated the averments contained in the affidavit.
5. Learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the respondents on instructions, submitted that the subject tree stands on the roadside and is not causing any hindrance to the petitioners' property. Therefore, the relief sought in the writ petition is not maintainable and prayed before this Court for dismissal of this writ petition.
6. This Court has carefully considered the rival submissions. The subject tree admittedly stands in road side and is just adjacent to the petitioners' property. Further, as seen from the photographs, the subject tree is a huge one and is a shading tree. Therefore, this Court is of the view that such type of trees 3/5
should not be removed and is not inclined to grant the relief sought for. Accordingly, the writ petition stands dismissed. However, it is open to the petitioners to cut only those branches of the subject tree that are close to their compound wall, prior permission with the respondent, without disturbing the tree on the road side at their own cost. No costs. 24.11.2025 Index:Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order vsi2 To
1. The District Collector Collectorate Campus, Vandavasi Road, Kanchipuram 631 501 2.The Revenue Divisional Officer Pattanoolchathram, Sriperumbudur Kanchipuram 602105 3.The Tahsildar Kundrathur Taluk Mehta Nagar Main Road, Chennai 69 4.The Panchayat Chairman Gerugambakkam Main Road, Kolapakkam Chennai 128 4/5
M. DHANDAPANI, J.
vsi2 24.11.2025 (2/2) 5/5