Muthuramalingam R v. The District Collector,

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 22.08.2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.SARAVANAN R.Muthuramalingam ... Petitioner Vs.

1.The District Collector, Madurai District, Madurai 625 020.

2.The Commissioner, 3.The Executive Engineer (Planning), 4.The Sub Registrar, Sub - Registration Office, Nagamalai Pudukkottai, Madurai 625 019.

5.The Member Secretary, Madurai Local Planning Authority, Department of Urban Planning,

...Respondents

1/6

Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents to grant approval for the petitioner's house plot Nos.4A, 7A, Part of 8, 9A, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 17A, 19 and 20 in S.No.17/1 situated at Kokkulappi Village, Madurai West Taluk, Madurai Corporation, Madurai based on the representation dated 10.04.2025 within a time frame fixed by this Court. For Petitioner : Mr.A.C.Namburaj For R1, R4 & R5 : Mr.R.Suresh Kumar Additional Government Pleader For R2 & R3 : Mr.K.K.Kannan, Standing Counsel

ORDER

This writ petition has been filed for a writ of Mandamus to direct the respondents to grant approval for the petitioner's house plot Nos.4A, 7A, Part of 8, 9A, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 17A, 19 and 20 in S.No.17/1 situated at Kokkulappi Village, Madurai West Taluk, Madurai Corporation, Madurai based on the representation dated 10.04.2025.

2. The petitioner appears to have obtained approval from the first respondent in respect of Plot Nos.21 to 31. Now, the petitioner has submitted a 2/6

representation dated 10.04.2025 to the second respondent for approval of plot Nos.4A, 7A, Part of 8, 9A, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 17A, 19 and 20 in S.No.17/1 situated at Kokkulappi Village, Madurai West Taluk, Madurai Corporation, Madurai.

3. It is noticed that the petitioner has not obtained a similar approval from the first respondent in respect of the aforesaid plots.

4. The learned Additional Government Pleader for the respondents 1, 4 and 5 submits that unless the petitioner had obtained an approval from the first respondent in respect of the aforesaid plots, no further approval/permission can be granted by the second respondent Corporation.

5. Having considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned Additional Government Pleader for the respondents 1, 4 and 5 and the learned Standing Counsel for the respondents 2 and 3, I am of the view that directing the second respondent to consider the petitioner's representation dated 10.04.2025 is premature. 3/6

6. Therefore, it is open to the petitioner to approach the second respondent for necessary approval, once the petitioner secures the approval for the aforesaid plots, similar to the approval granted for Plot Nos.21 to 31 from the first respondent vide proceedings dated 17.12.2018 bearing reference Na.Ka.No. 4342/2018/kjp2.

7. The writ petition stands dismissed with the above liberty. No costs. 22.08.2025 NCC : Yes / No Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes / No sn To 1.The District Collector, Madurai District, Madurai 625 020.

2.The Commissioner, 4/6

3.The Executive Engineer (Planning), 4.The Sub Registrar, Sub - Registration Office, Nagamalai Pudukkottai, Madurai 625 019.

5.The Member Secretary, Madurai Local Planning Authority, Department of Urban Planning, 5/6

C.SARAVANAN, J.

sn 22.08.2025 6/6