VoxJuris
Home › High Courts › Madras High Court 2026 › High Court of Madras

Amudha Rajkumar v. Tthe Commissioner

DISMISSED
Court
High Court of Madras
Decided
12 January 2026
Bench
S.M. Subramaniam, S. Sounthar
Case no.
WP 1065/2026

Follow Madras High CourtFollow S.M. SubramaniamFollow S. Sounthar

Judgment

ORDER (Order of the Court was made by S.M.SUBRAMANIAM, J.) Notice issued under Section 128 of the Tamil Nadu Urban Local Bodies Act, 1998, dated 31.12.2025, came to be challenged in the present Writ Petition.

¶2The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner, in response to the impugned notice, submitted all the documents to establish his rights. However, no final order has been passed. Thus, the present Writ Petition came to be instituted.

¶3The learned Standing Counsel appearing for Coimbatore Corporation would oppose by stating that the petitioner was identified as an encroacher in the public road. He has encroached upon the public road and constructed building. Thus, the authorities have initiated enforcement action to evict the encroachers. The procedure has been followed. The explanation along with the documents, if any filed before the authority, will be considered in accordance with the provisions of the Act.

¶4The petitioner states that he has already submitted his explanations along with the documents in response to the impugned notice dated

31.12.2025 issued under Section 128 of the Tamil Nadu Urban Local Bodies Act, 1998. Therefore, the authorities competent have to look into the documents and the explanations submitted by the petitioner and take a final decision and pass final orders without causing any undue delay. Even therefore, if encroachments are identified, the authorities shall proceed with the enforcement actions and remove all the encroachments by following the procedures.

¶5With the above directions, this Writ Petition stands dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petitions are closed. (S.M.S.,J.) (S.S.,J.) 12-01-2026 Index: Yes Asi To

¶1Tthe Commissioner Coimbatore corporation, Central zone, Coimbatore

¶2The Assistant Commissioner, Central zone, Coimbatore corproation, Coimbatore 18

¶3The Assistant Town Planning Officer, Central zone, Coimbatore corproation, Coimbatore 18 WPoNo.o1065oofo2026 S.eM.eSUBRAMANIAM,eJ. and S.eSOUNTHAR,eJ. Asi W.P.eNo.e1065eofe2026 12-01-2026 Pageo6oofo6

Case details

Parties and counsel

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 12-01-2026 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S. M. SUBRAMANIAM AND THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE S. SOUNTHAR W.P. No. 1065 of 2026 and W.M.P.No.1235 and 1241 of 2026 Amudha Rajkumar W/o Late Rajkumar, D. No 164, Race Course Road, Coimbatore 187 Office at 1-1A Kongu Nagar, Trichy Road, Ramanathapuram, Coimbatore 641 045 ..Petitioner(s) Vs 1. The Commissioner Coimbatore corporation, Central zone, Coimbatore 2. The Assistant Commissioner, Central Zone, Coimbatore Corporation, Coimbatore 18 3. The Assistant Town Planning officer Central zone, Coimbatore Corporation, Coimbatore 18 ..Respondent(s) The Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records of the 3rd Respondnet in Na.Ka. no 3535 / 2024 / H1 M, dated 31.12.2025 and quash the same and consequently direct the Respondents 2 and 3 to consider the ptitioners reply representation dated 03.01.2026 within a time limit that may be fixed by this Court. For Petitioner(s): Mr. B. Kumarasamy For Respondent(s): Mr.N.Velmurugan, Standing Counsel R1 to R3

Source: High Court of Madras, through the eCourts High Court services, via the Indian High Court Judgments open dataset by Dattam Labs (CC BY 4.0). Text was extracted from the official PDF and may contain conversion errors. Check the official PDF before relying on it.