Kamatchi v. The Chief Engineer-I
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 28-11-2025
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE M.DHANDAPANI KAMATCHI Petitioner(s) Vs
1. The Chief Engineer-I Tamilnadu Urban Habitat Development Board, No.5, Kamarajar Salai, Chepauk (Near Vivekananda House), Chennai-600 005 2.The Executive Engineer (Division-III) Tamil Nadu Urban Habitat Development Board, T.P. Chatram (opposite Of K-6 Police Station) Chennai-600 010 3.The Assistant Revenue Officer (Zone-8) Greater Chennai Corporation, No.519, Anna Nagar Main Road, N.S.K. Nagar, Arumbakkam, Chennai-600 109.
Respondent(s) PRAYER; This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondent 2nd to issue an allotment letter to the petitioners house at No.519, N.S.K. Nagar, IIIrd Avenue Chennai-600106 by way of considering the representation of the petitioner dated 04.08.2025 within the specific period of time fixed by this Hon'ble Court. For Petitioner(s):
M/s. D.Magesh For Respondent:
Mr.S.Karthikeyan RR1 & 2 Ms.Aswini Devi R3
ORDER
This petition has been filed seeking a direction to the respondent 2nd to issue an allotment letter to the petitioners house at No.519, N.S.K. Nagar, IIIrd Avenue Chennai-600106 by way of considering the representation of the petitioner dated 04.08.2025 within the specific period of time fixed by this Hon'ble Court.
2. It is the case of the petitioner that the petitioner is in occupation of the above said address, which is allocated in her favour by the respondent's board and she has constructed a house in the said site and residing there with her family for past 50 years. She is property paying property tax from the year 2005 and she is paying fees to water supply and drainage board till date. Electricity is in her husband name and paying the charges till date. But from the date of allotment, the respondent did not issued any allotment order to the petitioner. Therefore, the petitioner has made a representation to the respondents with the above said prayer and the same is not considered. Hence, the present writ petition.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that this Court may direct the respondents to consider and pass orders on the petitioners representation within the stipulated time as fixed by this Court.
4. The learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents submitted that there is no representation received from the petitioner so far.
5. Heard the learned counsel for both side and perused the materials available on record.
6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and in view of the limited request sought for by the petitioner, this court directs the petitioner to make a fresh representation to the respondents within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Upon receipt of the same, the second respondent is directed to consider and pass orders on the petitioner's representation within a period of six weeks thereafter.
7. With the above directions, the writ petition is disposed of. No costs. 28-11-2025 rli Index:Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Internet:Yes To 1.The Chief Engineer-I Tamilnadu Urban Habitat Development Board, No.5, Kamarajar Salai, Chepauk (Near Vivekananda House), Chennai-600 005
2.The Executive Engineer (Division-III) Tamil Nadu Urban Habitat Development Board, T.P. Chatram (Opposite Of K-6 Police Station) Chennai-600 010 3.The Assistant Revenue Officer (Zone-8) Greater Chennai Corporation, No.519, Anna Nagar Main Road, N.S.K. Nagar, Arumbakkam, Chennai-600 109
M.DHANDAPANI J.
rli 28-11-2025