Madras High Court
Madurai Thennaga Vaniyar Sangam vs The Commissioner on 17 February, 2026
Author: Krishnan Ramasamy
Bench: Krishnan Ramasamy
W.P.(MD) No.2180 of 2026
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENGH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 17.02.2026
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KRISHNAN RAMASAMY
W.P.(MD)No.2180 of 2026
Madurai Thennaga Vaniyar Sangam,
through its Secretary,
P.Murugan ... Petitioner
Vs
1.The Commissioner,
HR and CE Department, Chennai.
2.The Joint Commissioner,
HR and CE Department, Madurai.
3.The Puttu Urchava Kattalai,
Through its Trustee A. Venkateshkumar Puttu Thope
Main Road, Madurai 625016.
4.The Executive Officer,
Arulmighu Puttu Chockanathar Thirukovil,
Madurai. ... Respondents
Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India
praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents 2 and 4
to remove the lock and seal so as to enable the third respondent to
redeliver the possession of the Kalyana Mandapam and execute fresh
lease agreement in respect of the property in Puttu Thope Main Road,
1/7
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 25/02/2026 11:33:26 am )
W.P.(MD) No.2180 of 2026
Madurai - 625016, as per the order dated 25.08.2025 in SLP C.No.22672
of 2025 and order dated 16.08.2013 in AP.No.20/2013/D2 of the first
respondent in favour of the petitioner Sangam, as requested by the
petitioner Sangam.
For Petitioner : Mr.V.R.Shanmuganathan
For R-1 and R-2 : Mr.K.Balasubramani,
Special Government Pleader
For R-3 : Mr.S.Madhavan
For R-4 : Mr.S.Manohar
ORDER
This Writ Petition has been filed seeking a direction to respondent Nos.2 and 4 to remove the lock and seal affixed to the Kalyana Mandapam situated at Puttu Thope Main Road, Madurai – 625016, so as to enable the third respondent to redeliver possession of the premises to the petitioner Sangam and to execute a fresh lease agreement in respect of the said property, in terms of the order dated 25.08.2025 passed in SLP (C) No.22672 of 2025 and the order dated 16.08.2013 made in A.P.No.20/2013/D2 by the first respondent.
2. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner had earlier filed A.P.No.20 of 2013 before the Commissioner, HR & CE Department, seeking approval for fixation of 2/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 25/02/2026 11:33:26 am ) W.P.(MD) No.2180 of 2026 fair rent. The first respondent, by order dated 16.08.2013, passed appropriate directions permitting the petitioner to seek a fresh lease of the said premises upon fixation of fair rent. It was further observed that the petitioner may approach the competent authority through the second respondent for effecting transfer of tenancy in its name and to pay the rent as may be fixed by the authority. The relevant paragraph of the said order is extracted hereunder:
“...
Therefore, if the appellants want to create a fresh lease for the said premises, it is open to the appellants to approach the competent authority through second respondent-Kattalai to effect name transfer of the tenancy and for fresh lease after wiping of the entire arrears of rent within the stipulated time as may be fixed by that authority and to abide by the terms and conditions imposed by the second respondent Kattalai. If any application is filed for name transfer and fresh lease by the appellants, the competent authority / Joint Commissioner is directed to consider the same in accordance with law. It is also made clear that this order is passed subject to the outcome of the final verdicts to be passed by the Hon'ble High Court in writ appeal No.1330 of 2013.” 3/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 25/02/2026 11:33:26 am ) W.P.(MD) No.2180 of 2026
3. The learned counsel further submitted that the said order was challenged before the Writ Court and thereafter in Writ Appeal and ultimately before the Hon’ble Supreme Court in SLP (C) No.22672 of 2025. The Hon’ble Supreme Court dismissed the Special Leave Petition on 25.08.2025, thereby confirming the order passed by the Commissioner. It was contended that pursuant to the said orders, the petitioner has paid the entire arrears and other amounts as directed, including the lease amount. Therefore, the petitioner is entitled to execution of a fresh lease deed in its favour, in terms of the order dated 16.08.2013.
4. It was further submitted that the petitioner has already made a petition seeking execution of a fresh lease and redelivery of possession, but the same is yet to be considered.
5. The learned Special Government Pleader appearing for respondent Nos.1 and 2 submitted that the petition of the petitioner would be considered and appropriate orders would be passed within a reasonable time, if a direction is issued by this Court.
4/7https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 25/02/2026 11:33:26 am ) W.P.(MD) No.2180 of 2026
6. Taking into consideration the submissions made on either side, the first respondent is directed to consider and dispose of the petitioner’s petition seeking execution of a fresh lease in terms of the order dated 16.08.2013 made in A.P.No.20 of 2013 and to pass appropriate orders, including handing over possession, if the petitioner has complied with all the conditions and paid the amounts as directed, within a period of twelve weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
7. Accordingly, this Writ Petition stands allowed. No costs.
17.02.2026 TSG Speaking/Non-speaking order Index : Yes / No Neutral Citation : Yes / No To
1.The District Collector, Dindigul District, Dindigul.
2.The Land Acquisition Officer cum Revenue Divisional Officer, Dindigul to Karur Railway Broad Gauge Double Track Project, Palani, Dindigul District.
5/7https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 25/02/2026 11:33:26 am ) W.P.(MD) No.2180 of 2026
3.The General Manager, Southern Railway, Head Office, Park Town, Chennai-600 003.
6/7https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 25/02/2026 11:33:26 am ) W.P.(MD) No.2180 of 2026 KRISHNAN RAMASAMY, J.
TSG W.P.(MD)No.2180 of 2026 17.02.2026 7/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 25/02/2026 11:33:26 am )