Case Note & Summary
The writ petition was filed by C.K. Shanmugan under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking a mandamus to direct the Assistant Engineer, Ward No. 121, Greater Chennai Corporation, to inspect the construction carried out by the fourth respondent, Vadivammal, at Door No. 30, Thullukannam Garden, Dr. Natesan Road, Triplicane, Chennai, and issue a stop work notice on the ground that the construction was blocking a pathway. The petitioner had made a representation dated 07.06.2024, but no action was taken. Upon notice, the Greater Chennai Corporation officials appeared and filed an additional status report. The report revealed that during routine inspection, deviations from the approved plan were found, including unauthorised construction of a wall in the stilt floor, balcony projections on the first and second floors, and a partly constructed third floor. The deviation details were tabulated, showing excess construction of 20.12 sq. m. on the first and second floors, unauthorised terrace floor construction of 28.98 sq. m., and height increase by 3 m. The Corporation had already issued a notice for production of documents on 12.02.2025 and a notice for inspection on 20.02.2025, with inspection held on 22.02.2025. The Standing Counsel for the Corporation submitted that further action would be taken following due procedures under the Act and Rules. The court, noting the steps already taken, directed the Corporation to initiate all further actions expeditiously, preferably within twelve weeks from the date of receipt of the order copy. The writ petition was disposed of with no order as to costs. The judgment did not cite any specific legal provisions or precedents; it primarily gave a factual direction to complete the enforcement process. The court refrained from issuing a peremptory mandamus and instead relied on the Corporation’s assurance of due process, effectively balancing private grievance with regulatory compliance. The outcome favoured the petitioner to the extent that the Corporation was compelled to act, but without granting the specific relief of an immediate stop work notice. The bench comprised Justices S.M. Subramaniam and K. Rajasekar.
Headnote
A) Municipal Law - Unauthorised Construction - Mandamus for Inspection and Stop Work Notice - Not mentioned - The petitioner sought a writ of mandamus to direct the Greater Chennai Corporation to inspect an ongoing construction and issue a stop work notice for blocking a pathway. The Corporation filed a status report admitting unauthorised deviations and stating that notices for production of documents and inspection had already been issued. Held, further actions were to be initiated by following due procedure; the writ petition was disposed of with a direction to complete the process within twelve weeks (Paras 1-6).
Issue of Consideration
Whether a writ of mandamus should be issued directing the Greater Chennai Corporation to inspect the alleged unauthorized construction and issue a stop work notice for blocking the pathway.
Final Decision
The writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the Greater Chennai Corporation to initiate all further actions by following due procedures as expeditiously as possible, preferably within twelve weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of the order. No costs.
Law Points
- Legal points not extracted
- Writ of mandamus
- direction to follow due procedure
- unauthorised construction
- inspection and stop work notice
- municipal corporation obligations
