[Cites 1, Cited by 0]
Madras High Court
S.Gokul vs The Greater Chennai Corporation on 10 March, 2026
W.P.No.9159 of 2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 10.03.2026
CORAM :
THE HONOURABLE MR. SUSHRUT ARVIND DHARMADHIKARI,
CHIEF JUSTICE
AND
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.ARUL MURUGAN
W.P.No.9159 of 2026
S.Gokul
Old No.221/9, New No 268/2,
Sri Varisaashwat,
Race Course Road,
Coimbatore South,
Coimbatore - 641 018.
Petitioner
Vs
1.The Greater Chennai Corporation
Rep. by its Commissioner,
Ripon Building, Chennai - 600 003.
2.The Assistant Commissioner (GA & P)
General Department,
Greater Chenani Corporation,
Ripon Building, Chennai - 600 003.
3.The Zonal Officer
Zone 9, Greater Chennai Corporation,
No 4, 4th Cross Street,
Lake View Road, Nungambakakm,
Chennai - 600 034.
______________
Page 1 of 5
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 10/03/2026 06:48:02 pm )
W.P.No.9159 of 2026
4.The Special Officer
Mudhalvarin Mugavari Department,
Secretairat, Chennai - 600 009.
5.B.Usha
W/o.Balasundraram,
No 1182, TNHB Colony, 97th Lane,
Velachery, Chennai - 600 042.
Respondents
PRAYER: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India
seeking issuance of a writ of mandamus directing respondents to
conduct immediate inspection of the 3rd respondent's property and to
initiate enforcement action, including stop-work, lock and seal, and
demolish of construction raised in violation of FSI and setback norms
with further directions to the respondents to complete such action
within a time-bound period.
For Petitioner: Mr.A.Gokula Krishna
(through Video-Conferencing)
For Respondents: Mr.D.B.R.Prabhu
Standing Counsel
for R1 to R3
Ms.Akia Rajendran
Government Advocate
for R4
ORDER
(Order of the Court was made by the Hon'ble Chief Justice)
The grievance of the petitioner is that the fifth respondent,
who is the owner of the adjacent property, is putting up
construction in gross violation of the sanctioned building plan and
______________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 10/03/2026 06:48:02 pm )
the Tamil Nadu Combined Development and Building Rules. In this
regard, even though the petitioner has already submitted a
representation on 12.9.2025 to the first respondent/Commissioner,
Greater Chennai Corporation, till date the respondent authorities
have not taken any action.
2. Learned counsel for the respondent/Corporation fairly
submitted that, in case the representation of the petitioner has not
been decided, the same shall be decided in accordance with law by
giving an opportunity to all the parties concerned within four weeks.
3. In view of the aforesaid submission made by learned
counsel for respondent/Corporation, we direct respondent Nos.1 to
3 to decide the representation within a period of four weeks and
pass a reasoned and speaking order after giving opportunity of
hearing to all concerned.
4. Writ petition is disposed of with the aforesaid directions.
There shall be no order as to costs.
______________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 10/03/2026 06:48:02 pm )
We make it clear that we have not expressed any opinion on
the merits of the matter.
(SUSHRUT ARVIND DHARMADHIKARI,CJ) (G.ARUL MURUGAN,J)
10.03.2026
Index : Yes/No
Neutral Citation : Yes/No
sasi
To:
1.The Commissioner,
Greater Chennai Corporation
Ripon Building, Chennai 600 003
2.The Assistant Commissioner
(GA & P)
General Department,
Greater Chenani Corporation,
Ripon Building, Chennai 600 003
3.The Zonal Officer
Zone 9, Greater Chennai Corporation,
No 4, 4th Cross Street,
Lake View Road, Nungambakakm,
Chennai 600 034
4.The Special Officer
Mudhalvarin Mugavari Department,
Secretairat, Chennai 600 009
______________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 10/03/2026 06:48:02 pm )
THE HON'BLE CHIEF JUSTICE
AND
G.ARUL MURUGAN,J.
(sasi)
10.03.2026
______________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 10/03/2026 06:48:02 pm )
