Madras High Court
Administrative and Public LawProperty and Real Estate Law

Tenants Granted Four Months to Vacate Before Municipal Authorities May Enforce the Government Order.

M.SUKUMAR vs THE ADDITIONAL SECRETARY (TECHNICAL)

Madras High CourtJUDGMENT: October 08, 20262 MIN READSOURCE JUDGMENT
Tenants Granted Four Months to Vacate Before Municipal Authorities May Enforce the Government Order.. M.SUKUMAR vs THE ADDITIONAL SECRETARY (TECHNICAL). Madras High Court. LawLens
THE ORIGINAL LAWLENS SUMMARY
01

Facts

The petitioners challenged the Government’s letter dated 6 May 2026, issued under Section 80-A of the Tamil Nadu Town and Country Planning Act.

Source reference: p.2

During the hearing, they stated that they were tenants and would vacate the premises, and filed undertakings proposing to do so within six months.

Source reference: p.3

The Additional Government Pleader objected that six months was excessive, referring to an earlier contrary statement by the building owners.

Source reference: p.3

The petitioners’ Senior Counsel asked the Court to fix a reasonable period for vacating.

Source reference: p.3
02

Issues

1. Whether the petitioners should be granted time to vacate the premises, and, if so, what period would be reasonable.

Source reference: p.3

2. Whether the Corporation could proceed with eviction and implement the Government’s order if the petitioners failed to vacate within the time granted.

Source reference: p.3
03

Law Applied

The Court referred to Section 80-A of the Tamil Nadu Town and Country Planning Act as the basis for the Government’s enforcement action.

Source reference: pp.2–3

It did not cite any precedent or set out a broader legal test for determining the time to vacate; it fixed the period having regard to the facts and circumstances, while preserving the authorities’ ability to enforce the Government’s order in accordance with law.

Source reference: p.3
04

Reasoning

The petitioners’ undertakings established their willingness to vacate, but the Government’s objection to the requested six-month period arose from the building owners’ earlier contrary statement.

Source reference: p.3

In view of that objection and the petitioners’ request that the Court determine a reasonable period, the Court granted four months from receipt of its order, rather than the six months proposed in the undertakings.

Source reference: p.3

It did not determine the substantive merits of the challenge to the Government’s letter in the order.

Source reference: p.3
05

Holding

The Court disposed of the writ petition and granted the petitioners four months from receipt of a copy of the order to vacate the premises.

If they failed to do so, the Chennai Corporation authorities were directed to evict them, take possession, and implement the Government’s order in the manner known to law.

Source reference: p.3

There was no order as to costs; WMP No. 44192 of 2026 was ordered on payment of separate court fee, and WMP No. 44193 of 2026 was closed.

Source reference: pp.3–4
06

Acts & Sections Cited

1 provisions across 1 statute referred to in this judgment. Linked provisions open on LawLens.

Tamil Nadu Town and Country Planning Act, 19711

Section 80A
Madras High Court

Original Court PDF

M.SUKUMARvsTHE ADDITIONAL SECRETARY (TECHNICAL)

Madras High Court · October 08, 2026

Click to open original judgment

Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in

Click to open original judgment