Madras High Court
WP/6309/2018 of Mrs.T.T.P.Kadeeja Vs The Executive Engineer, Zone 5 on 2 November 2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 02-11-2026
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S. M. SUBRAMANIAM
AND
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE R.RAJESH VIVEKANANTHAN
WP No. 6309 of 2018, 5071, 13159, 13168 of 2004, 17224 of 2005, 1303 to 1307 of 2008, 5519, 5520, 5777 to 5780, 5837, 5896, 6202 to 6207, 6433, 6542, 6621, 6629, 6668, 6669, 6729 to 6731, 7671, 7706, 7917 to 7919, 7927, 7928, 7966, 8008, 8009, 8056, 9363, 8057, 8061, 8952, 8953, 9211, 9468, 9587, 9597, 9681, 9689, 9800, 10353, 10354, 11067 to 11069, 11241 to 11244, 11540 to 11542, 11598, 11599, 11602, 11620, 6680, 7652 to 7654, 7777 to 7781, 8793, 9469, 9690, 11113, 11827, 11828, 12091, 12092, 16024, 12857 & 24283 of 2018
CNR: {HCMA010237332018}
WP.No.6309 of 2018:
T.T.P.Kadeeja
..Petitioner(s)
Vs
1. The Executive Engineer, Zone 5
Greater Chennai Corporation, Ripon
Building, Chennai-03
2. The Assistant Executive
Engineer, Unit-14, Zonal Office-V,
Greater Chennai Corporation, Ripon
Building, Chennai-03
3. The Assistant Engineer
Division-59, Zonal Office-V, Greater
Chennai Corporation, Ripon Building,
Chennai-03
..Respondent(s)
Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India issuing writ of certiorarified mandamus calling for the records on the file of the Respondents relating to the issuance of Lock & Seal and Demolition
Notice under Ref. No.05/ 03836/ 2018 dated 12.02.2018 under Section 57 read with Section 85 of the Town and Country Planning Act, 1971 as amended by Act, 61 of 2008 in relation to the property belonging to the petitioner situate at Door No.454/ 164, VOC Salai, Edapalayam Chennai 600 003 and quash the same as illegal, invalid and non-est in the eyes of law and consequently direct the Respondents to consider her reply dated 21.01.2018 dispassionately and accord sufficient time for production of the original Sanctioned Plan in relation to the aforesaid property.
For Petitioner(s):
Ms.Vasudha Thiagarajan (W.P.No.6309 of
Mr.Palani Selvaraj (W.P.No.5071, 13159,
13168 of 2004
Mr.S.Srinivasanarayanan (W.P.No.17224 of
Mr.C.Samadharma Arasu (W.P.No.1303 and
1307 of 2008)
Mr.K.Mani (W.P.No.5519 and 5520 of 2018)
Mr.R.Krishnasamy (W.P.No.5777 to 5780 &
5837 of 2018)
Mr.S.L.Sudarsanam (W.P.No.5896 of 2018)
Mr.S.Abubakar for Mr.V.S.Sivasundaram
(W.P.No.6202 to 6207 of 2018)
Mr.P.Ganapathy (W.P.No.6433 of 2018)
Mr.S.Vinod (W.P.No.6542 of 2018)
Mr.A.Palaniappan (W.P.Nos.1304 to 1306 of 2008, 6621, 6629, 6668, 6669, 6729 to 6731, 7671, 7706, 7917 to 7919, 7927, 7928, 7966, 8008, 8009, 8056, 9363, 8057, 8061, 8952, 8953, 9211, 9468, 9587, 9597, 9681, 9689, 9800, 10353, 10354, 11067 to 11069, 11241
to 11244, 11540 to 11542, 11598, 11599,
11602 & 11620 of 2018)
Mr.S.K.Bhasker (W.P.No.6680 of 2018)
Mr.S.Sadasharam (W.P.No.7652 to 7654,
7777 to 7781 & 8793 of 2018)
Mr.R.Rajendran for Mr.R.Dhineshkumar
(W.P.No.9469 of 2018)
Mr.S.N.Narasimhulu (W.P.No.9690 of 2018)
Mr.Pratik S Shah for M/s.Shah and Shah
(W.P.No.11113 of 2018)
Mr.V.Manohar (W.P.No.11827, 11828, 12091, 12092 & 16024 of 2018)
Mr.P.Sidharthan (W.P.No.12857 of 2018)
Mr.N.Baaskaran (W.P.No.24283 of 2018)
For Respondent(s):
Ms.R.V.Gayatri
Standing Counsel (Greater Chennai
Corporation) for respondents in all writ petitions Vakalat not filed for respondents
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.
COMMON ORDER
(Order of the Court was made by S.M.Subramaniam J.) The present batch of writ petitions have been instituted challenging the enforcement action initiated under the provisions of the Tamil Nadu Town and Country Planning Act, 1971 (for brevity, hereinafter referred to as ‘Act’).
2. Writ petitions have been instituted challenging the lock and seal and demolition notice, de-occupation notice and stop-work notice issued under the Act.
3. Scheme under the Act would make it clear that persons receiving lock and seal notice are expected to rectify the deviations and demolish the unauthorized construction or prefer an appeal before the
Government under Section 80A of the Act. Adjudication of factual disputes regarding unauthorized construction / deviations are required to be done with reference to the documents and evidences available on record. Disputed facts of this nature cannot be adjudicated by the High Court in a writ proceeding. Factual findings in this regard by the original authority and appellate authority are of paramount importance for exercising the powers of judicial review under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. High Court is not expected to conduct a roving enquiry into disputed facts, wherein the owner claims certain rights and authority issues notice for lock and seal the premises or demolish the unauthorized portion of the constructions.
4. In the present batch of writ petitions, some petitioners have already submitted their representation to the authority. Reading of the impugned lock and seal notice and demolition notice would show that the writ petitioners have been called upon to restore the land to its condition before the construction took place within thirty days from the date of receipt of this notice, failing which action will be taken under Sub Section (4) of Section 57 of the Town and Country Planning Act, 1971 to lock and seal the premises and to demolish to restore the land to its original condition.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that building was constructed by the Corporation in the land belongs to the Corporation. However, learned counsel for the Corporation would oppose by stating that land belongs to the Corporation but the constructions made by the petitioners are unauthorized.
6. Such disputed facts are to be adjudicated before the Government under Section 80A of the Act. Petitioners are at liberty to raise all the factual as well as legal grounds before the Government by preferring an appeal under Section 80A of the Act. However, the writ petitions are not maintainable, since disputed facts are to be adjudicated in the manner known to law.
7. In view of the above factum, petitioners are at liberty to prefer an appeal under Section 80A of the Town and Country Planning Act within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. On receipt of any such appeal from the writ petitioners, Government shall entertain the same without reference to limitation and decide the issues on merits and in accordance with law as expeditiously as possible.
8. Accordingly, the writ petitions are disposed of. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions, if any, are closed. (S.M.S.,J.) (R.R.V.,J.) 02-11-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Neutral Citation: Yes/No GD Note: Registry is directed to type the remaining cause titles. To
1. The Executive Engineer, Zone 5 Greater Chennai Corporation, Ripon Building, Chennai-03
2. The Assistant Executive Engineer, Unit-14, Zonal Office-V, Greater Chennai Corporation, Ripon Building, Chennai-03
3. The Assistant Engineer Division-59, Zonal Office-V, Greater Chennai Corporation, Ripon Building, Chennai-03
S.M.SUBRAMANIAM, J. AND R.RAJESH VIVEKANANTHAN, J. GD WP No. 6309 of 2018, 5071, 13159, 13168 of 2004, 17224 of 2005, 1303 to 1307 of 2008, 5519, 5520, 5777 to 5780, 5837, 5896, 6202 to 6207, 6433, 6542, 6621, 6629, 6668, 6669, 6729 to 6731, 7671, 7706, 7917 to 7919, 7927, 7928, 7966, 8008, 8009, 8056, 9363, 8057, 8061, 8952, 8953, 9211, 9468, 9587, 9597, 9681, 9689, 9800, 10353, 10354, 11067 to 11069, 11241 to 11244, 11540 to 11542, 11598, 11599, 11602, 11620, 6680, 7652 to 7654, 7777 to 7781, 8793, 9469, 9690, 11113, 11827, 11828, 12091, 12092, 16024, 12857 & 24283 of 2018 02-11-2026