A.R.Abdul Riyas v. The District Collector
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 19.09.2025
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE DR.JUSTICE ANITA SUMANTH AND THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN and W.M.P.(MD)No.20329 & 20331 of 2025 A.R.Abdul Riyas ... Petitioner /Vs./
1. The District Collector, Office of the District Collector, Trichy District.
2. The Commissioner, Office of the Commissioner, Tiruchirappalli City Municipal Corporation, Barathidasan Salai, Contonment, Tiruchirappalli - 620001.
... Respondents PRAYER:- Writ Petition - filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records pertaining to the impugned order in Na.Ka.No.F1/8255/2025 (M-5) dated 08.08.2025 issued by respondent No.2 and quash the same and 1/4
consequently direct the respondent No.2 to not to eradicate the petitioner's building located at Door No.B-57, Block C, Andakondan Kudisai Pagudhi, Chinnsamy Nagar, Urban No.17, Block 29, Urban Ward-Y, Zone -5 Tiruchirappalli City Corporation. For Petitioner : Mr.G.Sujeeth For Respondents : Mr.J.Ashok (R1) Additional Government Pleader : No appearance (R2)
ORDER
(Order of the Court was made by DR.ANITA SUMANTH, J.) Mr.J.Ashok, learned Additional Government Pleader, accepts notice for R1.
2.Since the matter is listed for admission, there is no representation for R2. However, an identical matter was considered on 18.09.2025 in W.P(MD)No.25771 of 2025 and we have dismissed the same by way of the following order:
'Challenge is to the notice dated 08.08.2025 issued under Section 128(1) of the Tamil Nadu Urban 2/4
Local Bodies Act, 1998.
2.The petitioner claims to be the owner of Door No.209, Block C, Andakondan Kudisai Pagudhi, Chinnsamy Nagar, Urban No.17, Block 29, Urban Ward - Y, Zone-5, Tiruchirappalli City Corporation (property/property in question). While so, she has received the impugned notice dated 08.08.2025 on the ground that there are unauthorized constructions thereupon and she has been given opportunity of 7 days to regularize the same.
3.The notice affords an opportunity of seven days, which, by virtue of Act 25 of 2024, stands extended to 15 days for the noticee to respond.
4.Be that as it may, even the period of 15 days is long gone. We are of the view of the Writ Petition is pre mature and it is for the petitioner to respond to the authority by submitting her explanation. Instead of doing so, she has approached this Court and that too, long beyond the period granted soliciting her reply. 5.Learned counsel for the petitioner, faced with this position, seeks a short extension of time to enable the petitioner to file her reply. Accordingly, time is extended by one week from today within which time the reply shall be filed.
6.This Writ Petition is dismissed with liberty. No costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petitions are closed.'
3. In light of identity in facts and circumstances, the aforesaid order is taken to be passed in the present matter as well. 3/4
DR.ANITA SUMANTH, J.
AND C.KUMARAPPAN, J.
4. This Writ Petition is dismissed with liberty. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed. [A.S.M.J.,] & [C.K.J.,] 19.09.2025 NCC :Yes/No Index :Yes/No Internet :Yes sl To
1. The District Collector, Office of the District Collector, Trichy District.
2. The Commissioner, Office of the Commissioner, Tiruchirappalli City Municipal Corporation, Barathidasan Salai, Contonment, Tiruchirappalli - 620001.
and W.M.P.(MD)No.20329 & 20331 of 2025 4/4