K.SATHEESH KUMAR vs THE STATE OF TAMIL NADU
- Court
- Madras High Court
WP No. 30978 of 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 08-10-2026
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE P.T. ASHA
WP No. 30978 of 2024
CNR:{HCMA011845552024}
K.Satheesh Kumar
S/o.E.A.Kanakasabapathy, No.45D, Thasami
Park, Residency Singanallur, Coimbatore-641
005.
..Petitioner(s)
Vs
1. The State of Tamil Nadu
Rep. By The Secretary To The Government,
Housing And Urban Development
Department, Fort St. George, Chennai-600
004.
2. Tamil Nadu Housing Board
Rep. By Its Chairman And Managing
Director, No.493, Anna Salai, Nandanam,
Chennai.
3. The Executive Engineer Cum
Administrative Officer Tamil Nadu Housing
Board, Coimbatore Housing Unit, HUDCO
Colony, Pelamedu, Coimbatore-641 004.
__________
Page1 of 9
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 16/10/2026 05:02:45 pm )
WP No. 30978 of 2024
4. The Special Tahsildar
Land Acquisition, Housing Scheme Unit No.
II, Tamil Nadu Housing Board,
Coimbatore-641 012.
5. The Tahsildar
Coimbatore North,Coimbatore 641 018.
..Respondent(s)
Prayer:- Writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India
praying for issuance of a writ of Mandamus directing the 2nd and 3rd
respondent board to consider the representation of the petitioner dated
19.07.2024 and issue a No-objection Certificate to the petitioner in respect
of his properly comprised in SF. No.968/6B, 968/8B and 968/9 in
Kalapatti Village, Coimbatore District within a fixed time period.
For Petitioner(s): Mr.B.Prashanth Nadaraj
For Respondent(s): Mr.M.Senthamizh Selvan,
Additional Government Pleader for
R1,R4 andR5
Mr.V.Gunasekaran
For R2 and R3
__________
Page2 of 9
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 16/10/2026 05:02:45 pm )
WP No. 30978 of 2024
Order
This Writ Petition has been filed seeking a direction to the
respondents 2 and 3 to consider the representation of the petitioner dated
19.07.2024 and issue a No-objection Certificate to the petitioner in respect
of his property comprised in SF. Nos.968/6B, 968/8B and 968/9 in
Kalapatti Village, Coimbatore District within a specified period.
2. The case of the petitioner is that he is the absolute owner of
25.87 cents of land in S.F. Nos. 968/6B, 968/8B and 968/9 in Kalapatti
East Village, Coimbatore District, having purchased the same on
10.03.2006.
3. The petitioner would submit that the respondents had initiated
land acquisition proceedings for acquiring 9.62.0 hectares of land
comprised in S.F. Nos. 964/1, 968, etc., in Kalapatti Village for a housing
scheme, specifically the “Kalapatti Neighbourhood Scheme”. A
notification under Section 4(1) of the erstwhile Land Acquisition Act was
published on 26.09.1994, followed by a declaration under Section 6 on
17.11.1995. The petitioner's vendors, who were the original owners of the
__________
Page3 of 9
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 16/10/2026 05:02:45 pm )
WP No. 30978 of 2024
property comprised in S.F. No.968, challenged the acquisition proceedings
by filing W.P. No. 25766 of 2005. By order dated 16.02.2006, this Court
set aside the entire land acquisition proceedings as no award had been
passed within two years from the date of the declaration under Section 6.
The said order had attained finality, and no appeal was preferred by the
respondents. The petitioner states that the acquisition proceedings relating
to his property were also set aside by this Court. However, he is unable to
freely deal with his property, as the authorities insist on obtaining a ‘No
Objection Certificate’ from the second respondent for mutation of the
revenue records and alienation of the property.
4. The petitioner would submit that his name was included in the
joint patta only in June 2024. Though he submitted a representation to the
second respondent on 19.07.2024 seeking a certificate clarifying that the
acquisition proceedings had been set aside, no certificate has been issued
so far. The petitioner relies on a similar case in W.P.No.26719 of 2017,
wherein this Court directed the Tamil Nadu Housing Board to issue a ‘No
Objection Certificate’ clarifying that the acquisition proceedings had been
set aside and that the Board was not the owner of the property. Hence, the
petitioner has filed the present writ petition seeking a direction to the
__________
Page4 of 9
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 16/10/2026 05:02:45 pm )
WP No. 30978 of 2024
second respondent to consider his representation and issue the necessary
certificate.
5. A perusal of the records would reveal that the lands comprised
in S.F. Nos. 968/6B, 968/8B and 968/9 in Kalapatti East Village,
Coimbatore District, form part of the larger extent of 9.62.0 hectares
sought to be acquired by the respondents for the Kalapatti Neighbourhood
Scheme. A notification under Section 4(1) of the erstwhile Land
Acquisition Act was published on 26.09.1994, followed by a declaration
under Section 6 on 17.11.1995. The petitioner's vendors, who were the
original owners of the property comprised in S.F.No.968, challenged the
acquisition proceedings by filing W.P. No. 25766 of 2005. By order dated
16.02.2006, this Court set aside the entire land acquisition proceedings on
the ground that no award had been passed within two years from the date
of the declaration under Section 6.
6. The petitioner would submit that, when he sought subdivision
of the property and issuance of an individual patta, the fourth respondent
refused his request on the ground that a ‘No Objection Certificate’ had not
__________
Page5 of 9
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 16/10/2026 05:02:45 pm )
WP No. 30978 of 2024
been obtained from the second respondent. This requirement appears to be
unreasonable, particularly when a similarly placed landowner, whose
property was comprised in S.Nos. 968/6 and 968/8, was granted a ‘No
Objection Certificate’ pursuant to the order passed by this Court in
W.P. No. 26719 of 2017.
7. Once the acquisition proceedings in respect of the subject property
have been set aside, the second respondent cannot claim ownership over
the property or insist upon a ‘No Objection Certificate’ without any valid
basis. That apart, when a similarly placed landowner has been granted the
benefit of such a certificate pursuant to the orders of this Court, the
respondents cannot deny the same to the petitioner in similar
circumstances.
8. In view of the fact that the land acquisition proceedings have been
set aside and that a ‘No Objection Certificate’ has been directed to be
issued in a similar case, this Court is of the view that the petitioner is
entitled to the relief sought for.
__________
Page6 of 9
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 16/10/2026 05:02:45 pm )
WP No. 30978 of 2024
9. Accordingly, this Writ Petition is allowed. The respondents 2
and 3 are directed to consider the petitioner's representation dated
19.07.2024 and issue a ‘No Objection Certificate’ in respect of the
property comprised in S.F. Nos. 968/6B, 968/8B and 968/9 in Kalapatti
Village, Coimbatore District, within a period of four weeks from the date
of receipt of a copy of this order. No costs.
08-10-2026
Index: Yes/No
Speaking/Non-speaking order
Neutral Citation: Yes/No
SRN
To
1. The Secretary to the Government, Housing
And Urban Development Department, Fort
St. George, Chennai-600 004.
2. The Chairman And Managing Director,
Tamil Nadu Housing Board No.493, Anna
Salai, Nandanam, Chennai.
3. The Executive Engineer Cum
Administrative Officer Tamil Nadu Housing
Board, Coimbatore Housing Unit, Hudco
Colony, Pelamedu, Coimbatore-641 004.
__________
Page7 of 9
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 16/10/2026 05:02:45 pm )
WP No. 30978 of 2024
4. The Special Tahsildar
Land Acquisition, Housing Scheme Unit
No.II, Tamil Nadu Housing Board,
Coimbatore-641 012.
5. The Tahsildar
Coimbatore North,Coimbatore 641 018.
__________
Page8 of 9
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 16/10/2026 05:02:45 pm )
WP No. 30978 of 2024
P.T.ASHA J.
SRN
WP No. 30978 of 2024
08-10-2026
__________
Page9 of 9
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 16/10/2026 05:02:45 pm )