Tamilnadu Husing Board v. N.Gomathi

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT Dated : 09.06.2026

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N.SATHISH KUMAR and THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.JOTHIRAMAN and C.M.P(MD)No.3654 of 2025 1.Tamil Nadu Housing Board, Rep. by its Managing Director, Nandanam, Chennai-600 035.

2.The Executive Engineer cum Administrative Officer, Ellis Nagar Unit Officer, Tamilnadu Housing Board, Madurai-625 016.

... Appellants/Respondents Vs.

1.N.Gomathi ... Respondent/Petitioner 2.State of Tamil Nadu, Rep by its Principal Secretary to the Government, Housing and Urban Development, Fort St. George, Chennai-600 009.

... Respondent/Respondent PRAYER :- Writ Appeal filed under Clause 15 of Letters Patent, against the order made in W.P(MD)No.626 of 2021, dated 10.10.2023. 1/5

For Appellants : Mr.A.Kannan For R2 : Mr.M.S.Parthiban Counsel for State

JUDGMENT

(Judgment of the Court was made by N.SATHISH KUMAR, J.) Challenging the order of the learned Single Judge disposing of the writ petition, respondents 2 and 3 have filed the present writ appeal.

2. The case of the first respondent is that the subject plot was allotted to him under the discretionary quota through a work order dated 21.06.2004. Subsequently, the allotment was cancelled by the Government through a Government Order dated 14.08.2006. Aggrieved by the cancellation, the allottees filed writ petitions in W.P. No. 9086 of 2006 and connected cases. By order dated 02.06.2007, this Court allowed the writ petitions and set aside the impugned Government Order. Since the allotment was not effected even thereafter, the present writ petition came to be filed.

2/5

3. The learned Single Judge, after taking note of the order passed by the Division Bench in Rev. Appl. (MD) No. 146 of 2021 dated 16.06.2023, disposed of the writ petition by directing the petitioner to submit a fresh representation to respondents 2 and 3 seeking allotment of the plot.

4. We have also perused the order of the Division Bench. In Rev. Appl. (MD) No. 146 of 2021, the Division Bench held as follows: "7.We find that the same methodology could be followed in the case of the petitioner also. The sale deeds that were executed in favour of the other persons, have also been produced and the amount that they were paid is reflected in the said sale deeds. The petitioner will also be required to pay the said amount as reflected in the sale deeds in favour of the other allottees along with interest at 9% on the amount shown as consideration in the sale deed from 01.05.2016 till date of payment and upon payment of the consideration, the Housing Board will execute the sale deeds within 30 days from the date of payment of the consideration. The petitioner will bear the costs of the sale also."

3/5

5. It is also stated that the said order was challenged before the Hon'ble Supreme Court in SLP (Civil) Diary No. 53360 of 2023, which was dismissed by order dated 25.01.2024. Consequently, the order has attained finality. Therefore, there cannot be any discrimination, and the benefit of the said order shall also apply to the petitioner.

6. We do not find any merit in the writ appeal. Accordingly, the writ appeal stands dismissed. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

[N.S.K., J.] & [M.J.R., J.] 09.06.2026 Index : Yes / No : Ye / No am To The Principal Secretary to the Government, Housing and Urban Development, Fort St. George, Chennai-600 009.

4/5

N.SATHISH KUMAR , J.

AND M.JOTHIRAMAN, J.

am 09.06.2026 5/5