U.Parthan v. The Commissioner

ORDER This writ petition is filed for the following relief : "directing the 1st respondent to take action on the communication received from the 2nd respondent vide Petition No.1639/2026/CORPOR/CC-HQ

dated

10.02.2026

by Superintendent of Police (DVAC – Chennai Range) and act on the same within a stipulated period fixed by this Court."

¶2The brief facts are as follows :

2.1. The petitioner has filed a complaint against the Greater Chennai Corporation on 21.01.2026 with regard to issuance of Form – 6 (new property tax assessment against rules and regulations of Greater Chennai Corporation, which was received by the 2nd respondent, who in turn, sent a communication dated 10.02.2026 to the 1st respondent for taking necessary action on verification of document by the department and the same was received by the 1st respondent on 25.03.2026. Thereafter, the petitioner had sent a representation to the 1st respondent dated 17.03.2026, which was also received by the 1st respondent on 24.03.2026. Despite the same, the 1st respondent has not taken any action on the same. Hence, the present writ petition.

¶3Heard the learned counsel on either side and perused the materials available on record. Page3 of 5

¶4In normal circumstances, this Court would have issued the mandamus, however, on a perusal of the records it appears that, the petitioner's father was an agreement holder. The property in question belong to one Anser Begum. The said Anser Begum had executed a power of attorney in favour of the petitioner's father's Employee one Ravichandran. The petitioner's father had constructed 9 flats out of which two was sold and two remained unsold and was retained by the petitioner's father.

¶5However, from a reading of the order in I.A.No.3 of 2023 in O.S.No.4317 of 2023 on the file of XVII Assistant City Civil Court, Chennai, it appears that the property continued to stand in the name of his erstwhile owner. The Civil Court had taken note of the above facts and directed the parties to maintain status quo. Admittedly, the petitioner's father has not completely paid the sale consideration and taking note of this status quo, order was passed. Since the matter is already seized of by the civil Court, the petitioner has to first establish his title to the property and only thereafter, seek action against the said Anser Begum who is not even made a party here. The said Anser Begum is admittedly the original owner of the property. Therefore, having moved the civil Court, it is well open to the petitioner as well as the said Anser begum to submit their documents and get appropriate orders.

¶6The present writ petition appears to be an attempt to gather evidence Page4 of 5 and the writ Court cannot be used for the said purpose. Accordingly, this writ petition is dismissed. No costs. 06-08-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order rap To

¶1The Commissioner, Greater Chennai Corporation, No.1131, E.V.R.Periyar Salai, Park Town, Ripon Buildings, Chennai – 600 003.

¶2The Superintendent of Police, Chennai City Range, Vigilance and Anti-Corruption, Directorate of Vigilance and Anti-Corruption (DVAC), No.293, M.K.N.Road, Alandur, Chennai – 16. Page5 of 5

P.T.ASHA, J. rap 06-08-2026

Page1 of 5 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 06-08-2026 CORAM THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE P.T. ASHA U.Parthan ..Petitioner(s) Vs 1. The Commissioner, Greater Chennai Corporation, No.1131, E.V.R.Periyar Salai, Park Town, Ripon Buildings, Chennai – 600 003. 2. The Superintendent of Police, Chennai City Range, Vigilance and Anti-Corruption, Directorate of Vigilance and Anti-Corruption (DVAC), No.293, M.K.N.Road, Alandur, Chennai – 16. ..Respondent(s) Prayer: This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of a writ of mandamus directing the 1st respondent to take action on the communication received from the 2nd respondent vide Petition No.1639/2026/CORPOR/CC-HQ dated 10.02.2026 by Superintendent of Police (DVAC – Chennai Range) and act on the same within a stipulated period fixed by this Court. For Petitioner(s) : Mr.R.Amizhdhu For Respondent(s) : Mr.A.Arun Babu, Standing counsel for R1 Mr.S.Ilamvaludhi, Special Government Pleader for R2 Page2 of 5