High CourtsDivision Bench(2026) 09 MAD CK 1504

M.Sahul Hameed vs The Commissioner, Tuticorin Corporation & Anr.

Madras High Court, Madurai Bench · Decided on 8 September 2026

HON’BLE JUDGES
M. Dhandapani, J · N. Dilip Kumar, J
CASE NUMBER
W.P(MD)No.25917 of 2026

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

7 paragraphs · 433 words

(Order of the Court was made by M.DHANDAPANI, J.)

This Writ Petition has been filed for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, directing the 1st respondent to initiate appropriate legal action against the 2nd respondent, for the unauthorized construction erected in the common passage in Town Survey No.2680 and 2681 which is located on the Northern side of petitioner's property bearing Door No.266 and 267 within the Registration District of Tuticorin, Municipal Ward No. 31 of Town Survey No. 2682, Ward No.2, Block No.21 and also direct the 1st respondent to take legal action for unauthorized construction of two storied building by the 2nd respondent in Door No.268.

2.

Heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the materials available on record. By consent of both parties, the Writ Petition is taken up for final disposal at the stage of admission itself. Since no adverse order is going to be passed, notice to the second respondent is dispensed with.

3.

Alleging that the second respondent has constructed a building over the common passage leading to the septic tank area, without obtaining the requisite permission from the first respondent, thereby obstructing the use of the said common passage, the petitioner submitted a representation dated 29.08.2026 to the first respondent, seeking inspection of the subject property and removal of the alleged encroachment. Since no effective action has been taken on the said representation, the present Writ Petition has been filed.

4.

The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that it would suffice if this Court issues a direction to the official respondents to consider the petitioner's representation dated 29.08.2026 and pass appropriate orders thereon, on merits and in accordance with law, within a time frame to be fixed by this Court.

5.

The learned Standing Counsel appearing for the first respondent, on instructions, would submit that the first respondent will consider the petitioner's grievance and pass appropriate orders on merits and in accordance with law.

6.

Considering the above facts and circumstances of the case and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the matter, this Writ Petition is disposed of with a direction to the first respondent to consider the petitioner's representation dated 29.08.2026 and pass appropriate orders on merits and in accordance with law, after issuing notice to all necessary parties including the second respondent and affording them an opportunity of hearing. The entire exercise shall be completed as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.