Madras High Court
WP/36283/2026 of P.Gajendran Vs The District Collector on 8 September 2026
WP No. 36283 of 2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 08-09-2026
CORAM
THE HON'BLE DR JUSTICE G. JAYACHANDRAN
AND
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE E.MANOHARAN
WP No. 36283 of 2026
P.Gajendran
..Petitioner(s)
Vs
1. The District Collector
Ranipet Collector office
MBT Road, Bharathi Nagar
Ranipet-632 403.
2. The Commissioner
Arcot Municipality,
No.5, Santhapettai Street Arcot
Ranipet District-632 503.
..Respondent(s)
To
call for the records pertaining to the impugned notice dated 13.08.2026 issued by the 2nd respondent vide Na.Ka. No.0011 / 2026/ F1 and quash the same.
For Petitioner(s):
Ms.V.V.Uthra
For Respondent(s):
Mr.K.Surendar,
Spl.G.P., for R1.
Mr.P.Srinivas,
Standing Counsel, for R2.
( Uploaded on: 16/09/2026 01:44:52 pm )
WP No. 36283 of 2026
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORDER
(Order of the Court was made by Dr.G.Jayachandran J.) The writ petitioner herein, who has purchased a plot from Arcot Municipality, pursuant to a scheme floated by the said Municipality, is now before this Court, questioning the notice issued to him by the Municipality under Section 128 (1) of the Tamil Nadu Urban Local Bodies Act,1998, for removal of temporary structure put up on 7 mts. road.
2. Counsel for the petitioner submits that the plot measures 199.45 sq.mts. with specific boundaries. TSLR Sketch issued also specifies the boundaries. The construction of the petitioner is well within the boundaries mentioned, however, the notice has been issued for removal of the construction alleged to be made along the public road and the measurement of alleged encroachment is mentioned as 11.73 sq.mts. According to the counsel for the petitioner, notice itself suffers from inherent defect, for not issuing the same without prior notice for eviction.
3. Standing counsel appearing for second respondent submitted that the petitioner has put up a temporary slab on 7 metres road and also a compound wall across the drainage track by way of a cement road on 7 mts. road, which is identified as temporary encroachment, and notice has been issued under Section 128 of the Tamil Nadu Urban Local Bodies Act,1998, granting 15 days’ time to the petitioner for removal of encroachment, and the notice is dated 13.08.2026. Though time granted to the petitioner has elapsed, he has not removed the
( Uploaded on: 16/09/2026 01:44:52 pm )
WP No. 36283 of 2026
encroachment, but, he is before this Court, challenging the notice on frivolous grounds.
4. Photograph of the alleged encroachment is furnished to this Court for perusal. We find that the petitioner has put up a concrete slab on 7 mts. road and placed flower pots upon it. There is also a small wall about 4 ft., across the drainage. His house property is after the drainage. While so, whatever construction put up by the petitioner beyond his compound wall is clearly an encroachment, which falls within the scope of Section 128 of the Act, which empowers the Commissioner to remove the same without any notice if the structure is a movable temporary structure, enclosure, stall, booth or any article, and, if it is an immovable structure, permanent or temporary, encroaching street or public place, water body, tank, other water resources, or any land vests with the Municipality, the same can be done after issuing a show cause notice, for removal within a period of 15 days from the date of receipt thereof.
5. In this case, from the photograph, we find that the structure laid by the petitioner is a temporary structure and, apparently, it is on the pathway and public drainage. Notice issued under Section 128 has afforded 15 days’ time for the petitioner to remove the encroachment and also warned of penal action under Section 128 (2) if the encroachment is not removed. The petitioner, on receipt of the impugned notice, dated 13.08.2026, in fact, has replied to the same on 20.08.2026, denying the allegation of encroachment and unwarranted. He has fenced the property as per the sale deed and within the boundaries
( Uploaded on: 16/09/2026 01:44:52 pm )
WP No. 36283 of 2026
specified in the sale deed. Having been in continuous possession of the property paying taxes and holding patta for the said land, the allegation of encroachment to an extent of 11.73 sq.mts. is incorrect, false and contrary to the documents.
6. Though the petitioner claims that he has not encroached the public road or obstructed the drainage and whatever he has constructed is well within the boundaries of his property, the photograph furnished by the Standing Counsel for the Corporation clearly shows that there are some constructions on 7 mts. road and over the drainage, which is outside the compound wall of the petitioner’s house. While so, the petitioner can have no objection or right to retain the structures, which are found outside his compound wall, and, apparently, on the public road.
7. Therefore, we dismiss this Writ Petition, as devoid of merit. No costs. Consequently, the connected W.M.P.No.40598 of 2026 is closed. (G.J.,J.) (E.M.,J.) 08-09-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Neutral Citation: Yes/No DIXIT
( Uploaded on: 16/09/2026 01:44:52 pm )
WP No. 36283 of 2026
To The District Collector Ranipet Collector office MBT Road, Bharathi Nagar Ranipet-632 403. The Commissioner Arcot Municipality, No.5, Santhapettai Street Arcot Ranipet District-632 503.
( Uploaded on: 16/09/2026 01:44:52 pm )
WP No. 36283 of 2026
DR.G.JAYACHANDRAN, J. AND E.MANOHARAN, J. DIXIT WP No. 36283 of 2026 08-09-2026
( Uploaded on: 16/09/2026 01:44:52 pm )