Madras High Court Dismisses Writ Challenging Encroachment Notice Under Tamil Nadu Urban Local Bodies Act — Delegation of Powers Under Section 57(4) Validates Regional Deputy Commissioner's Authority to Issue Notice Under Section 128. The court held that the Commissioner's delegation of powers to Regional Deputy Commissioners under Section 57(4) is valid, and therefore the notice under Section 128 is not without jurisdiction.

High Court: Madras High Court In Favour of Prosecution
  • 30
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The petitioner, Lakshman, filed a writ petition challenging a notice issued under Section 128 of the Tamil Nadu Urban Local Bodies Act by the Regional Deputy Commissioner (South), Greater Chennai Corporation. The main contention was that the Regional Deputy Commissioner lacked the power to issue such a notice. The respondent argued that under Section 57(4) of the Act, the Commissioner may delegate any powers, duties, or functions to any municipal office holder. In exercise of this power, the Commissioner had delegated enforcement actions for removal of encroachments under Section 128 to the respective Regional Deputy Commissioners. The court examined the delegation and found it valid, thus the notice was not without jurisdiction. The court dismissed the writ petition but granted the petitioner liberty to submit explanations and documents to the authorities, who were directed to consider them and proceed with further enforcement actions as per law. No costs were awarded.

Headnote

A) Municipal Law - Delegation of Powers - Section 57(4) Tamil Nadu Urban Local Bodies Act - Validity of Delegation - The Commissioner of Greater Chennai Corporation delegated powers to Regional Deputy Commissioners to initiate enforcement actions for removal of encroachments under Section 128 of the Act. The court held that such delegation is valid under Section 57(4) and therefore the impugned notice cannot be said to be without jurisdiction. (Paras 2-4)

B) Municipal Law - Encroachment Notice - Section 128 Tamil Nadu Urban Local Bodies Act - Opportunity of Hearing - The petitioner was at liberty to submit explanations and documents to the authorities for consideration. The court directed that upon receipt, the authorities shall consider and continue appropriate further enforcement actions in accordance with law. (Para 4)

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether the Regional Deputy Commissioner of Greater Chennai Corporation has the power to issue notice under Section 128 of the Tamil Nadu Urban Local Bodies Act.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

Writ petition dismissed. Petitioner at liberty to submit explanations and documents to the authorities for consideration. On receipt, authorities to consider and continue appropriate further enforcement actions in the manner known to law. No costs.

Law Points

  • Delegation of powers under Section 57(4) of the Tamil Nadu Urban Local Bodies Act is valid
  • Regional Deputy Commissioner has authority to issue notice under Section 128 of the Act
  • Writ petition challenging notice on ground of lack of jurisdiction dismissed
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2026 LawText (MAD) (02) 341

WP No. 2867 of 2026

2026-02-02

S.M. Subramaniam, C. Kumarappan

2026:MHC:427

For Petitioner: Mr.MV.Siddharth, For Respondent: Mr.M.Suresh Kumar, Additional Advocate General Assisted By Ms.P.T. Rama Devi, Standing Counsel For RR1 & 2

Lakshman

The Regional Deputy Commissioner (South), Greater Chennai Corporation

Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more) Subscribe Now

Nature of Litigation

Writ petition challenging a notice issued under Section 128 of the Tamil Nadu Urban Local Bodies Act for removal of encroachment.

Remedy Sought

Petitioner sought to quash the notice issued by the Regional Deputy Commissioner (South), Greater Chennai Corporation.

Filing Reason

Petitioner contended that the Regional Deputy Commissioner had no powers to issue notice under Section 128 of the Tamil Nadu Urban Local Bodies Act.

Issues

Whether the Regional Deputy Commissioner has the power to issue notice under Section 128 of the Tamil Nadu Urban Local Bodies Act.

Submissions/Arguments

Petitioner argued that the Regional Deputy Commissioner lacks jurisdiction to issue notice under Section 128. Respondent argued that under Section 57(4) of the Act, the Commissioner delegated powers to Regional Deputy Commissioners to initiate enforcement actions for removal of encroachments under Section 128.

Ratio Decidendi

The Commissioner of Greater Chennai Corporation validly delegated powers under Section 57(4) of the Tamil Nadu Urban Local Bodies Act to Regional Deputy Commissioners to issue notices under Section 128 for removal of encroachments. Therefore, the impugned notice is not without jurisdiction.

Judgment Excerpts

The Commissioner may delegate any of the powers, duties or functions conferred or imposed upon or vested in him by or under this Act to the holder of any municipal office in accordance with such guidelines as may be prescribed. Since the powers are delegated, the impugned notice cannot be said to be without jurisdiction.

Procedural History

The petitioner filed a writ petition challenging a notice issued under Section 128 of the Tamil Nadu Urban Local Bodies Act by the Regional Deputy Commissioner (South), Greater Chennai Corporation. The court heard the matter and dismissed the petition on 02-02-2026.

Acts & Sections

  • Tamil Nadu Urban Local Bodies Act: 57(4), 128
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Allows Impleadment of Beneficiaries in Trust Petition — Order 1 Rule 10 CPC Applies. Court holds that persons claiming beneficial interest under a trust are necessary and proper parties to a trust petition under Section 41A of the...
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Allows Revision, Sets Aside Order Rejecting Discharge Application for Non-Compliance with Sections 226 and 227 Cr.P.C. — Mandatory Hearing Before Framing of Charge in Sessions Case