Madras High Court Property and Real Estate Law Administrative and Public Law

Madras HC Gives Chennai Officials 12 Weeks To Demolish Unauthorised Construction On Mylapore Building’s Common Terrace

By LawLens Team · Editorial and Research TeamDecided October 28, 2026Published 3 November 2026 at 2:44 pm IST2 min read

The LawLens card for this judgment

In brief

The question

1. Whether the official respondents should be directed to continue enforcement action against the unauthorised construction and secure its removal in accordance with law.

The court held

The Court disposed of the writ petition and directed the official respondents to continue enforcement action under the applicable statutes and rules, demolish the unauthorised portion and restore the building in accordance with the sanctioned plan within twelve weeks from receipt of a copy of the order.

It also directed

No costs were awarded, and any connected miscellaneous petitions were closed.

01Facts

The petitioners sought a mandamus directing the civic authorities to act against an alleged unauthorised construction of approximately 1,450 sq. ft. on the common terrace above the second floor of a building in Mylapore, Chennai.

p. 2

They alleged that the construction deviated from the sanctioned planning and building permissions and sought its removal, referring to their representations dated 11, 13 and 15 July 2026.

p. 2

The Greater Chennai Corporation reported that, after inspection, verification of the permissions and a survey, its authorities had identified unauthorised deviations and initiated enforcement action.

p. 3

02Issues

i.1. Whether the official respondents should be directed to continue enforcement action against the unauthorised construction and secure its removal in accordance with law.

pp. 2–4

ii.2. Whether the construction should be demolished and the building restored to conformity with the sanctioned building plan within a specified period.

p. 4

03Law Applied

The Court directed the authorities to continue enforcement action in accordance with the procedures prescribed by the relevant statutes and rules in force.

p. 4

The order does not identify any specific statute, statutory provision or precedent.

04Reasoning

The Corporation’s status report stated that an inspection and survey had disclosed deviations from the approved building plan and that enforcement proceedings had begun.

p. 3

The authorities confirmed that those proceedings would continue in accordance with the applicable procedures.

p. 4

In light of those findings and the ongoing enforcement action, the Court directed the official respondents to complete the process and remove the unauthorised portion, rather than leave the matter at the stage of considering the petitioners’ representations.

p. 4