Madras High Court

WP/43300/2026 of N.SUBRAMANIAN Vs THE COMMISSIONER on 26 October 2026

Cites 0, Cited by 0

WP.No.43300 of 2026

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 26-10-2026

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM

AND

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE R.RAJESH VIVEKANANTHAN

WP.No.43300 of 2026

CNR:{HCMA012547072026}

and

WMP.No.48610 of 2026

N.Subramanian

..Petitioner

Vs

The Commissioner

Namakkal Corporation

Namakkal District.

..Respondent

PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of Writ of Certiorari, to call for the records leading to impugned notice in Na.Ka.No.5548/2022/AF1 dated 10.06.2026 issued by the respondent under Section 128 of the Tamil Nadu Urban Local Bodies Act, 1998 and quash the same.

For Petitioner:

Mr.C.Jagadish

For Respondent:

Mr.M.Rajamathivanan

Standing Counsel

WP.No.43300 of 2026

Citations and Judicial Treatment

No citing decisions in the index yet

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…

ORDER

(Order of the Court was made by S.M.Subramaniam, J.) The Writ on hand has been instituted challenging the show cause notice issued by the Commissioner, Namakkal Municipality under Section 128 of the Tamil Nadu Urban Local Bodies Act (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”). The competent authorities of the Municipality during inspection identified encroachments and issued a show cause notice under Section 128 of the Act for removal of encroachment.

2. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would mainly contend that the subject portion of the land is a Patta land belongs to the petitioner, therefore, the impugned notice is to be set aside. The petitioner issued a legal notice through his counsel and instituted a civil suit in O.S.No.448 of 2022. The Sub Court, Namakkal dismissed the suit on the ground that it is not maintainable in view of Section 14 of the Tamil Nadu Land Encroachment Act, 1905. In respect of Government poramboke land, water bodies, maikkal poramboke, nilaviyal pathai, etc., suit is not maintainable. Since the suit was dismissed and the petitioner

WP.No.43300 of 2026

claims that it is a Patta land, he has chosen to file the present writ petition.

3. The learned Standing Counsel for Municipality would oppose by stating that the authorities after verifying the revenue records identified encroachment in the immovable property belongs to the Municipality and initiated enforcement action by following the procedures as contemplated under the Act, thus the writ petition is to be rejected.

4. Let us consider the scope of Section 128 of the Tamil Nadu Urban Local Bodies Act. Sub-section (1)(b) to Section 128 stipulates that the Commissioner may remove any immovable structure whether permanent or of temporary nature encroaching the street or public place or the land belonging to or vested with the Municipality within the municipal limit, after issuing a show cause notice for such removal returnable with a period of fifteen days from the date of receipt thereof, provided that the Commissioner shall consider any representation received within the time limit, before passing final orders. Therefore, the competent authority of the Local Bodies on identification of public lands

WP.No.43300 of 2026

have to issue a show cause notice calling upon the encroacher to remove the encroachments by himself within a period of fifteen days, failing which, the authorities will remove the encroachments. If any representation has been received from any such encroacher, then the authorities bound to consider the representation and take a final decision and thereafter, remove the encroachments.

5. In the context of the scope as contemplated under Section 128 of the Act, in the present case the show cause notice indicates that there is an encroachment identified in Survey No.23/17 which is classified as Government poramboke road. Against the show cause notice, no suit would lie and consequently, the legal notice issued is also unnecessary. The person who received such show cause notice is expected to submit his representation if he claims any right over the immovable property. In the present case, the petitioner claim right over the property and therefore, he is at liberty to submit his representation along with the documents, if any, to the respondent within a period of ten days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. On receipt of any such explanation/representation from the petitioner, the respondent shall

WP.No.43300 of 2026

consider the same and thereafter, take a final decision regarding encroachment and proceed with the enforcement action for removal of encroachments identified and resume the municipal property for public use.

6. With these observations, the Writ Petition stands dismissed. No costs. (S.M.S.,J.) (R.R.V.,J.) 26-10-2026 Index: Yes Speaking order Neutral Citation: Yes/No cse To The Commissioner, Namakkal Corporation, Namakkal District.

WP.No.43300 of 2026

S.M.SUBRAMANIAM, J. AND R.RAJESH VIVEKANANTHAN, J. cse WP.No.43300 of 2026 26-10-2026

You have used today's free searches. Sign in, for free, to keep searching without a limit.

Compass reads the judgments for you and finds the paragraphs for and against your question. Sign in to use it.

My Vault follows judgments for you and records every later decision that cites them. Sign in to keep one.

Sign in to download the court's PDF. The full text stays free to read here.

Search and read Indian judgments without limits, save them to My Vault and find the relevant paragraphs with Compass.

Open the sign-in page instead