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

The Government of Tamil Nadu v. Kaliakkavilaithinasarisanthai Viyabarigal Nala Sangam

DISPOSED OF
Court
High Court of Madras
Decided
27 March 2026
Bench
G.R.Swaminathan, R. Poornima
Case no.
WA(MD) 1818/2024

Judgment

1 W.A.(MD)NO.1818 OF 2024 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 27.03.2026 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.R.SWAMINATHAN AND THE HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE R.POORNIMA W.A.(MD)Nos.1818 & 1819 of 2024 W.A.(MD)No.1818 of 2024

¶1The Government of Tamil Nadu, Rep. by its Secretary to Government, Municipal Administratiiion &Water Supply Department, St. George Fort, Chennai – 600 009.

¶2The Director of Town Panchayats, Urban Administrative Building, 75, Santhome High Road, MRC Nagar, Raja Annamalaipuram, Chennai – 600 028.

¶3The District Collector, Kanyakumari District, at Nagercoil.

¶4The Assistant Director of Town Panchayats, Nagercoil,

¶5Kaliakkavilai Town Panchayat, Rep. by its Executive Officer, 2 W.A.(MD)NO.1818 OF 2024

¶6The Special Officer, Kaliakkavilai Town Panchayat, ... Appellants/Respondents Vs. Kaliakkavilai Thinasari Santhai Viyabarigal Nala Sangam, Rep. by its Secretary, New No.1-112, St. Anthoniyar Complex, Kaliakkavilai Post, Kanyakumari District. ... Respondent / Writ petitioner Prayer: Writ appeal filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent Act, to set aside the order dated 07.12.2023 made in W.P.(MD) No.1611 of 2021 and allow this writ appeal. For Appellants : Mr.Veera Kathiravan, Additional Advocate General, assisted by, Mr.T.Amjad Khan, Government Advocate. For Respondents : Mr.M.Mahaboob Athiff * * * W.A.(MD)No.1819 of 2024

¶1The Government of Tamil Nadu, Rep. by its Secretary to Government, Municipal Administratiiion &Water Supply Department, St. George Fort, Chennai – 600 009. 3 W.A.(MD)NO.1818 OF 2024

¶2The Director of Town Panchayats, Urban Administrative Building, 75, Santhome High Road, MRC Nagar, Raja Annamalaipuram, Chennai – 600 028.

¶3The District Collector, Kanyakumari District, at Nagercoil.

¶4The Assistant Director of Town Panchayats, Nagercoil,

¶5Kaliakkavilai Town Panchayat, Rep. by its Executive Officer,

¶6The Special Officer, Kaliakkavilai Town Panchayat, ... Appellants/Respondents Vs. C.Kuttappan ... Respondent / Writ petitioner Prayer: Writ appeal filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent Act, to set aside the order dated 07.12.2023 made in W.P.(MD) No.13251 of 2021 and allow this writ appeal. For Appellants : Mr.Veera Kathiravan, Additional Advocate General, assisted by, Mr.T.Amjad Khan, Government Advocate. 4 W.A.(MD)NO.1818 OF 2024 For Respondents : Mr.M.Mahaboob Athiff * * * COMMON JUDGMENT (Order of the Court was delivered by G.R.SWAMINATHAN, J.) Heard both sides.

¶2The primary issue arising for consideration is whether the Special Officer of the Kaliyakkavilai Town Panchayat could have fixed the entry fee / license fee for the market. The learned single Judge held that the Special Officer has not been conferred with any such statutory power. Aggrieved by the order of the learned single Judge, these writ appeals have been filed.

¶3The learned Additional Advocate General points out that Section 375B of the Tamil Nadu District Municipalities Act inserted in the year 2016 itself confers such power but unfortunately the attention of the learned single Judge was not drawn to this amendment. The said provision reads as follows:- 5 W.A.(MD)NO.1818 OF 2024 "375-B. Appointment of Special Officers – Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, or in any other law for the time being in force, the State Government may, by notification, appoint Special Officers to exercise the powers and discharge the functions of the Municipalities or the Town Panchayats, as the case may be, until the day on which the first meetings of the councils are held after ordinary elections to the Municipalities or the Town Panchayats, as the case may be, after the date of commencement of the Tamil Nadu Municipal Laws(Third Amendment) Ordinance, 2016 or upto the 31st day of December, 2016, whichever is earlier."

4.In view of the above, the learned single Judge could not have held that the action of the Special Office was one without jurisdiction. To this extent, the order impugned in this writ appeal is set aside. These writ appeals are disposed of accordingly. No costs. (G.R.SWAMINATHAN, J.) & (R.POORNIMA, J.) 27th March 2026

NCC : Yes / No Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes / No PMU 6 W.A.(MD)NO.1818 OF 2024

G.R.SWAMINATHAN, J. AND

R.POORNIMA, J. PMU W.A.(MD)No.1818 of 2024

27.03.2026

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.