Case Note & Summary
The petitioner filed a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India before the High Court of Judicature at Madras, seeking a writ of mandamus directing the first respondent, the Commissioner of Greater Chennai Corporation, to consider his representation dated 28.10.2025 or to provide an alternative remedy. The dispute pertained to residential plots allotted by the Tamil Nadu Urban Habitat Development Board (formerly the Slum Clearance Board). The petitioner and the sixth respondent were both allottees of plots, and a dispute had arisen between them. The Slum Clearance Board had executed a sale deed in favour of Plot occupier 19. The petitioner, aggrieved by the allocation and the execution of the sale deed, submitted a representation to the first respondent seeking redressal. Instead of pursuing a civil suit, he approached the High Court for a writ of mandamus to compel consideration of his representation. The respondents, through their standing counsels, submitted that the matter was purely a private dispute between two plot owners. They further argued that since the Slum Clearance Board had already executed a sale deed in favour of one party, the petitioner’s remedy lay before a competent civil court, not in writ jurisdiction. The court, after hearing both sides, observed that the dispute was indeed a private one between two individuals concerning their respective rights in plots allotted by the Board. The court noted that the Board had already executed a sale deed, and the petitioner had no right to seek a mandamus in such a private matter. The court held that the writ petition was not maintainable and dismissed it, granting liberty to the petitioner to approach the appropriate civil court if any grievance existed. No costs were ordered. The decision underscores the principle that writ jurisdiction under Article 226 is not meant for adjudication of private property disputes where alternative remedies are available.
Headnote
A) Constitutional Law - Writ Jurisdiction - Maintainability of Writ of Mandamus for Private Disputes - Constitution of India, Article 226 - The petitioner sought a writ of mandamus to direct the respondent authority to consider his representation regarding a plot allocation dispute. The court noted that the dispute was between two plot owners who were allottees of the erstwhile Slum Clearance Board, and a sale deed had been executed in favor of Plot occupier 19. The court held that such a private dispute falls outside the scope of writ jurisdiction, and the petitioner was at liberty to approach the competent Civil Court. Held, writ petition dismissed as not maintainable. (Paras 1-2).
Issue of Consideration
Whether a writ of mandamus under Article 226 can be issued to direct the respondent authority to consider a representation in a private property dispute between allottees of the Tamil Nadu Urban Habitat Development Board?
Final Decision
Writ petition dismissed with liberty to approach competent civil court; no order as to costs.
Law Points
- Writ of mandamus under Article 226 is not maintainable for private disputes
- alternative remedy of civil suit must be availed.
