M.B.A.Tamilarasi v. The Commissioner

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 02.06.2026

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.SATHISH KUMAR AND THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.JOTHIRAMAN W.P.(MD)No.6826 of 2026 M.B.A.Tamilarasi ... Petitioner Vs.

1.The Commissioner, Tiruchirappalli City Corporation, Tiruchirappalli.

2.The Assistant Commissioner, Zone-5, Tiruchirappalli City Corporation, Tiruchirappalli.

3.Praburam 4.Anbalagan

...Respondents

[R3 & R4 are impleaded vide order dated 10.04.2026] PRAYER:- Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents to take action based on the representation dated 12.01.2026 within a time period as stipulated by this Court.

1/5

For Petitioner : Mr.A.V.Saha For Respondents : Mr.R.Baskaran (R1 & R2) Senior Counsel for M/s.R.B.Law Associates Mr.Arunjeyathram (R3 & R4)

ORDER

(Order of the Court was made by N.SATHISH KUMAR, J.) The petitioner has filed the present Writ Petition seeking a direction to the respondents to consider and dispose of the petitioner's representation within a time frame to be fixed by this Court. 2.Heard the learned counsel appearing on either side and perused the materials placed on record.

3.The grievance of the petitioner is that the private respondents has put up a construction without obtaining the requisite planning permission and approval from the competent authorities. 4.On the other hand, the learned Counsel for the private respondents submits that the construction was made in the year 1958 and is not a recent construction requiring such approval. 2/5

5.It appears that the dispute between the parties is as to whether the construction put up by the private respondents is a recent unauthorised construction or an existing structure put up several decades ago. It is also brought to the notice of this Court that allegations of violations have been made by both sides against each other. 6.The issue as to whether the construction was put up recently without approval or whether it is an old structure existing from the year 1958 can be determined only by way of conducting a proper enquiry by the competent authorities.

7.In such view of the matter, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the rival contentions, the official respondents are directed to conduct a detailed enquiry with regard to the alleged violations and to ascertain whether the construction put up by the private respondents is a recent unauthorised construction or an existing structure from the year 1958, as claimed by them.

3/5

8.The aforesaid enquiry shall be completed and appropriate orders shall be passed on merits and in accordance with law within a period of three (3) months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, the private respondents and all other persons concerned.

9.With the above directions, the writ petition stands disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.

[N.S.K., J.] & [M.J.R., J.] 02.06.2026 Index :Yes/No Internet :Yes ta To 1.The Commissioner, Tiruchirappalli City Corporation, Tiruchirappalli.

2.The Assistant Commissioner, Zone-5, Tiruchirappalli City Corporation, Tiruchirappalli.

4/5

N.SATHISH KUMAR, J.

AND M.JOTHIRAMAN, J.

ta W.P.(MD)No.6826 of 2026 02.06.2026 5/5