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

S.M.Govindasamy v. The District Collector

DISPOSED OF
Court
High Court of Madras
Decided
15 April 2026
Bench
The Chief Justice, G.Arul Murugan
Case no.
WP 13069/2026

Follow Madras High CourtFollow The Chief JusticeFollow G.Arul Murugan

Judgment

ORDER (Order of the Court was made by the Hon'ble Chief Justice) Heard on admission.

¶2The present writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeks a direction to respondents 1 to 5 to strictly implement a Division Bench judgment in the case of G.V.Granites v. V.A.Arunachalam [W.A.Nos.1716 and 1717 of 2014, dated 18.3.2015] with respect to the lands in Survey No.109, Kumilamparappu Village, Chithode, Erode District and consequently direct the official respondents to initiate immediate action under Sections 56 and 57 of the Tamil Nadu Town and Country Planning Act, 1971 against all unauthorised commercial developments, including respondents 6 and 7, functioning in the primary residential zone.

¶3During the course of hearing, learned counsel for the petitioner confines his prayer only to direct the competent authority to decide the representation of the petitioner, which is pending since

29.01.2025.

¶4Learned State counsel submitted that the competent authority would decide the representation of the petitioner on merits and in accordance with law as expeditiously as possible.

¶5In view of the aforesaid statement made by learned State counsel, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the competent authority to consider and dispose of the representation of the petitioner dated 29.01.2025 on merits and in accordance with law as early as possible and communicate a decision thereon to the petitioner. It is made clear that we have not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case. (SUSHRUT ARVIND DHARMADHIKARI, CJ) (G.ARUL MURUGAN,J)

15.04.2026 Index : : bbr To:

1.The District Collector Erode District, As the Chairman, District Planning and Development Authority, Erode District.

2.The Commissioner of Erode Corporation, Corporation Office, Bruff Road, Erode -638 011

3.The District Revenue Officer, District Collectorate Buildings, Perundurai Road, Erode -638 011

4.The Assistant Director, District Town and Country Planning Sambath Nagar, Uzhavar Sandhai Backside Gate, Erode -638 001

5.The Executive Engineer TANGEDCO, Erode Distribution Circle, Erode W.P.No.13069,of,2026 THE,HON'BLE,CHIEF,JUSTICE ,,,,AND ,G.ARUL,MURUGAN,,J., bbr W.P.No.13069,of,2026 ,,,,,

15.04.2026 Page,6,of,6

Case details

Parties and counsel

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 15.04.2026 CORAM : THE HONOURABLE MR. SUSHRUT ARVIND DHARMADHIKARI, CHIEF JUSTICE AND THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.ARUL MURUGAN S.M.Govindasamy Secretary, People Health and Development Council, No.22, East Sottaiyampalayam, R.N. Pudur Post, Erode -638 005 Petitioner Vs 1.The District Collector Erode District, As the Chairman, District Planning and Development Authority, Erode District. 2.The Commissioner of Erode Corporation, Corporation Office, Bruff Road, Erode -638 011 3.The District Revenue Officer, District Collectorate Buildings, Perundurai Road, Erode -638 011 4.The Assistant Director, District Town and Country Planning Sambath Nagar, Uzhavar Sandhai Backside Gate, Erode -638 001 5.The Executive Engineer TANGEDCO, Erode Distribution Circle, Erode 6.The Proprietor Guha Priya BPCL Pump Station, Kumilamparappur Village, Chithode Post, Erode-638 102 7.The Proprietor, Supreme Agencies, Kumilamparappu Village, Chithode Post, Erode -638 102 Respondents PRAYER : Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking issuance of a writ of mandamus directing the respondents 1 to 5 to strictly implement the Division Bench Judgment of this Hon'ble Court in M/s.S.G.V.Granites vs. V.A.Arunachalam with respect to the lands in Survey No.109, Kumilamparappu Village, Chithode, Erode District and consequently directing the official respondents to initiate immediate action under Sections 56 and 57 of the Tamil Nadu Town and Country Planning Act, 1971 against all unauthorized commercial developments, including the respondents 6 and 7 herein functioning in the primary residential zone within a time frame to be fixed by this Hon'ble Court. For Petitioner: Mr.P.Kumaravel For Respondents: Mr.K.Karthik Jagannath Government Advocate for R1, R3 and R4 Mr.M.Rajamathivanan Standing Counsel for R2

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.