V.R.Byravamoorthy v. Madurai City Municipal Corporation
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 18-03-2026
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY and W.M.P(MD).No.6317 of 2026 V.R.Byravamoorthy ... Petitioner Vs.
1. Madurai City Municipal Corporation, Represented by its Commissioner, Arignar Anna Maligai, Thallakulam, Madurai - 625 002.
2. The Assistant Commissioner, Zone 3 (Central), Madurai City Municipal Corporation, Arignar Anna Maligai, Thallakulam, Madurai - 625 002.
... Respondents PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Certiorari calling for the entire records in connection with the impugned notice of the 2nd respondent in Na.Ka.No. A1/15702/2024 dated 13.03.2026 and quash the same and pass such other or further orders as this Honble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of this case and thus render justice.
1/7
For Petitioner : Mr.K.K.Senthil For Respondents : Mr.N.Dilip Kumar Standing Counsel
ORDER
The writ petition is filed challenging the impugned notice dated 13.03.2026.
2. Heard Mr.K.K.Senthil, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr.N.Dilip Kumar, learned Standing Counsel, who takes notice on behalf of the respondents.
3. By the impugned notice the petitioner is called upon to vacate and hand over the shop in Block No.4 of Karuppatti Chathiram, located at Mela Veli veethi, Madurai. The building belongs to the Madurai Corporation and they have issued the notice on the ground that it is entirely in dilapidated condition.
2/7
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner alone has been singled out and issued the present notice.
5. As a matter of fact, as late as the year 2025, the lease for some other shopkeepers was extended for a period of 9 years. Therefore, the impugned notice is not a bona fide exercise of power, as the petitioner is a tenant, and the notice was issued solely to take action against the petitioner.
6. When the matter came up for hearing today, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent corporation produced a picture and submitted that the building is in an extremely dilapidated condition. The petitioner's averment that he has been singled out is factually incorrect. Notices have been issued to every occupant of the premises. Steps will be taken to evict everyone, as the building is in a dangerous condition. A picture was produced before the Court, showing the outer portions of the walls and pillars coming off, with trees and other shrubs growing on the open terrace. To the naked eye, the building appears dilapidated and in a state of dilapidation.
3/7
7. Furthermore, learned counsel for the Corporation would submit that the petitioner is in arrears of rent to a tune Rs.5,62,231/- for one shop and Rs.6,32,416/- for the other. He would further submit that all along the petitioner has never attempted to pay the rent.
8. That apart, he would submit that considering the extreme condition of the building, which poses a danger to human life unless it is evacuated at the earliest, the relief sought in the writ petition cannot be granted.
9. Accordingly, the writ petition stands dismissed. However, it is made clear that if the respondents are going to rent out to any third party without evacuation or demolition, the petitioner should be automatically reinstated into the portion. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
18.03.2026 Index: Yes Speaking Order: Yes rgm 4/7
5/7
To
1. Madurai City Municipal Corporation, Represented by its Commissioner, Arignar Anna Maligai, Thallakulam, Madurai - 625 002.
2. The Assistant Commissioner, Zone 3 (Central), Madurai City Municipal Corporation, Arignar Anna Maligai, Thallakulam, Madurai - 625 002.
6/7
D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY, J.
rgm and W.M.P(MD).No.6317 of 2026 18.03.2026 7/7