Mrs.Geethanjali Amuthasakaran v. The Chief Secretary

O R D E R Mr. M. Sivavarthanan, learned Government Counsel, accepts notice for respondents 1, 3 and 4. Mr. Durai Gunasekaran, learned Government Counsel, accepts notice for the second respondent. Mr. Akhil Akbar Ali, learned Standing Counsel, accepts notice for the fifth respondent. Mr. Abishek Murthy, learned Standing Counsel, accepts notice for respondents 6 and 7. Since the writ petition is being disposed of without affecting the rights of respondents 8 to 10, notice to them is dispensed with.

¶2The petitioner has filed the present writ petition seeking a direction to respondents 5, 6 and 7 to consider the representations dated 10.11.2025 and

18.11.2025 pursuant to the proceedings dated 09.02.2026 issued by the fourth Page Nos.4/7 respondent.

¶3The petitioner claims to have entered into a sale agreement with the tenth respondent for the purchase of a flat in a residential multi-storeyed complex. According to the petitioner, although the entire sale consideration has been paid, the tenth respondent has failed to hand over vacant possession of the flat. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner submitted a representation to the fourth respondent seeking action against the tenth respondent. Pursuant thereto, respondents 3 and 4 issued proceedings dated 09.02.2026 directing respondents 5, 6 and 7 to submit an action taken report with reference to the allegations made against the tenth respondent. The grievance of the petitioner is that, despite the said communication, respondents 5, 6 and 7 have not taken any action.

¶4The dispute, however, is purely between the petitioner and the tenth respondent. There is no allegation that the construction put up by the tenth respondent violates any statutory provision or the building approval granted by the competent authority. In the absence of any such violation, respondents 5, 6 and 7 are under no statutory obligation to initiate action against the tenth respondent or to withhold the issuance of a completion certificate merely Page Nos.5/7 because of the inter se dispute between the petitioner and the tenth respondent. The tenth respondent cannot be denied a completion certificate on that ground.

¶5In view of the above, and in the absence of any statutory duty cast upon respondents 5, 6 and 7, the writ petition is devoid of merit. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of, reserving liberty to the petitioner to work out his remedies before the appropriate forum. There shall be no order as to costs.

21.07.2026 Index : Yes / No Speaking / Non-speaking mk To

¶1The Chief Secretary Govt. of Tamil Nadu, Fort St.George Chennai.

¶2The Director General of Police Government of Tamil Nadu Chennai.

¶3The Secretary, Housing and Urban Development Department Government of Tamil Nadu, Page Nos.6/7 Secretariat, Fort St.Geroge Chennai-600 009.

¶4The Under Secretary Housing and Urban Development Department Government of Tamil Nadu Secretariat, Fort St.George Chennai-600 009.

¶5The Principal Secretary / Member Secretary Chennai Metropolitan Development Authority (CMDA) Thalamuthu Natarajan Maaligai No.1, Gandhi Irwin Road Egmore, Chennai-600 008.

¶6The Commissioner Greater Chennai Corporation Ripon Building, Chennai-600 003.

¶7The Executive Engineer Zone-11, Zonal Officer – 11 Greater Chenani Corporation No.33, Arcot Road, Valasaravakkam Chennai-600 087. Page Nos.7/7 HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR, J., mk

21.07.2026

Page Nos.1/7 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 21.07.2026 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR Geethanjali Amuthasakaran W/o.Senthilraj Natarajan ... Petitioner vs. 1. The Chief Secretary Govt. of Tamil Nadu, Fort St.George Chennai. 2. The Director General of Police Government of Tamil Nadu Chennai. 3. The Secretary, Housing and Urban Development Department Government of Tamil Nadu, Secretariat, Fort St.Geroge Chennai-600 009. 4. The Under Secretary Housing and Urban Development Department Government of Tamil Nadu Secretariat, Fort St.George Chennai-600 009. 5. The Principal Secretary / Member Secretary Chennai Metropolitan Development Authority (CMDA) Page Nos.2/7 Thalamuthu Natarajan Maaligai No.1, Gandhi Irwin Road Egmore, Chennai-600 008. 6. The Commissioner Greater Chennai Corporation Ripon Building, Chennai-600 003. 7. The Executive Engineer Zone-11, Zonal Officer – 11 Greater Chenani Corporation No.33, Arcot Road, Valasaravakkam Chennai-600 087. 8. L.Deepak David Lamech alias Deepak Lamech S/o.Late J.R.Lamech 9. D.Nikhil Thambiraja Lamech S/o.Deepak Lamech 10. M/s.Radiance Reality Developers India Ltd., having its registered office at 1st Floor, Old Door No.333/110 New Door No.111, 33 Feet Road, Anna Salai, Guindy, Chennai-600 032 Represented by its authorized signatory either V.Balaji or K.Kannadasan … Respondents Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents 4, 6 and 7 to consider the representations dated 10.11.2025 and 18.11.2025 pursuant to the proceeding passed by the 4th respondent dated 09.02.2026 in its Letter No.12696232/UD 6(2)/2025-1. Page Nos.3/7 For Petitioner : Mr.R.Rajagopal for Mrs.R.Jansirani For Respondents : Mr.M.Sivavarthanan Government Counsel, for R1, R3 & R4 Mr.Durai Gunasekaran Government Counsel, for R2 Mr.Akhil akbar Ali, Standing Counsel, for R5 Mr.Abishek Murthy Standing Counsel, for R6 & R7 *****