Sabura v. The District Collector

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 18.09.2025

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE DR.JUSTICE ANITA SUMANTH AND THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN and W.M.P(MD)Nos.20162 & 20163 of 2025 Sabura ... Petitioner Vs.

1.The District Collector, Office of the District Collector, Trichy District.

2.The Commissioner, O/o. The Commissioner, Tiruchirappalli City Municipality Corporation, Barathidasan Salai, Contonment, Tiruchirappalli - 620 001.

... 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 1/5

consequently direct the respondent No.2 to not to eradicate the petitioner's building located at Door No.209, Block C, Andakondan Kudisai Pagudhi, Chinnsamy Nagar, Urban No.17, Block 29, Urban Ward -Y, Zone-5, Tiruchirappalli City Corporation. For Petitioner : Mr.C.Sujeeth For R - 1 : Mr.J.Ashok Additional Government Pleader For R - 2 : Mr.K.R.Kishore Ram for M/s.R.B.Law Associates

ORDER

(Order of the Court was made by DR.ANITA SUMANTH, J.) Challenge is to the notice dated 08.08.2025 issued under Section 128(1) of the Tamil Nadu Urban 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.

2/5

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. [A.S.M.J.,] & [C.K.J.,] 18.09.2025 NCC :Yes/No Index :Yes/No Internet :Yes ps 3/5

To 1.The District Collector, Office of the District Collector, Trichy District.

2.The Commissioner, O/o. The Commissioner, Tiruchirappalli City Municipality Corporation, Barathidasan Salai, Contonment, Tiruchirappalli - 620 001.

4/5

DR.ANITA SUMANTH, J.

AND C.KUMARAPPAN, J.

ps 18.09.2025 5/5