Case Note & Summary
The petitioner filed a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking a direction to the Commissioner, Corporation of Chennai, to conduct an enquiry on the petitioner's complaint dated 19.11.2024 against the Zonal Office regarding alleged demolition of property and to file an enquiry report within a stipulated time. During the hearing, the learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the Corporation had provided a reply under the Right to Information Act, 2005, stating that the Corporation had not demolished the subject property mentioned in the complaint. In light of this disclosure, the counsel submitted that no further adjudication was required. Accepting this submission, the Court found that the grievance did not survive and that no further orders were necessary. The writ petition was accordingly closed with no order as to costs. No substantive legal issues were framed or decided; the Court simply recorded the RTI reply and disposed of the matter without any determination of rights or liabilities.
Headnote
A) Writ Jurisdiction - Disposal of Writ Petition - No cause of action survives - Right to Information Act, 2005 - Petitioner sought enquiry into demolition complaint; Corporation replied under RTI Act that no demolition occurred; Held petition closed no costs. (Order)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the writ petition should be entertained given the RTI reply from the Corporation that no demolition had occurred
Final Decision
Writ Petition closed. No costs.
Case Details
2025 LawText (MAD) (02) 205
S.M. Subramaniam, K. Rajasekar
Ms. G. Umamaheswari for petitioner; Mr. T. Chandrasekaran, Special Government Pleader for R1
1. The Secretary, Housing Urban Development Department; 2. The Commissioner, Corporation of Chennai; 3. The Zonal Office, Zone No.XV, Corporation of Chennai
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking mandamus to direct the second respondent to conduct enquiry on the petitioner's complaint regarding demolition of property and to file an enquiry report.
Remedy Sought
Direction to the second respondent to conduct an enquiry on the complaint dated 19.11.2024 against the third respondent and to file an enquiry report within a stipulated time.
Filing Reason
Petitioner complained that the Corporation had demolished the subject property and sought an enquiry into the complaint.
Issues
Whether a direction should be issued to the second respondent to enquire into the demolition complaint.
Submissions/Arguments
Petitioner's counsel submitted that the Corporation had given a reply under RTI Act stating that the Corporation had not demolished the subject property; therefore, no further adjudication required and the petition may be closed.
Judgment Excerpts
The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that with reference to the complaint dated 19.11.2024, the Corporation has given a reply under the Right to Information Act (RTI), 2005, stating that the Corporation has not demolished the subject property mentioned in the complaint submitted by the petitioner.
Thus, no further adjudication is required and the Writ Petition stands closed. No costs.
Procedural History
The writ petition was heard by the Division Bench. Counsel for petitioner reported the RTI reply and submitted that no further adjudication is required. The Court accordingly closed the petition.
Acts & Sections
- Right to Information Act, 2005:
