IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 28-01-2010 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M.JAICHANDREN Writ Petition No.12369 of 2009 & M.P.No.1 of 2009 Uma Natarajan .. Petitioner. Versus 1.The Commissioner Corporation of Chennai Rippon Building Chennai- 600 003. 2.The Assistant Commissioner Corporation of Chennai For division 127, Rippon Building Chennai – 600 003 3.The Junior Engineer, Division 127, Usman Road T.Nagar Chennai- 600 017 .. Respondents. Prayer: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a Writ of certiorari to call for the records in notice dated nil on the file of the respondents and quash the same as illegal,arbitrary and against the law. For petitioner : Mr.A.Thiagarajan For respondents : Mr.V.Bharathidasan O R D E R This Writ Petition has been filed praying for a writ of certiorari to quash the impugned notice, dated nil, issued by the first respondent, directing the petitioner to remove the ramp on the south balcony projections at the southern and western sides and the sunshade on the northern side of the compound wall/building portion constructed on the road margin, within two days from the date of receipt of the said notice. It had also stated that, in the event of petitioner's failure to comply with the said notice, appropriate https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ action for the removal of the encroachments would be taken by the Corporation of Chennai. 2. At this stage of the hearing of this Writ Petition, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner had stated that there are no encroachments, as alleged by the respondents. Further, a report, dated 14.10.2009, has been filed by the Advocate Commissioner, appointed by this Court to find out whether there is any encroachment by the petitioner, as alleged by the respondents. From the said report, it can be seen that the petitioner has not made any encroachment, as alleged in the impugned notice issued by the first respondent. Further, the petitioner has obtained a decree, dated 27.06.1997, in O.S.No. 667 of 1996, restraining the respondents, by way of a permanent injunction, from, in any manner permitting the pavement hawkers to encroach upon the conservancy lane on the nothern side of the suit properties. 4.The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner had also submitted that the respondents may be directed to take further action, if it is found to be necessary, after considering the objections raised in his representation, dated 20.03.2009. 5. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents had submitted that the respondents will take appropriate action, as per law, after considering the report of the Advocate commissioner, dated 14.10.2009 and the objections raised by the petitioner in his representation, dated 20.03.2009. 6.In view of the submissions made by the learned counsels appearing on behalf of the parties concerned, the first respondent is directed to consider the report of the Advocate Commissioner, dated 14.10.2009 and the objections raised by the petitioner in his representation, dated 20.03.2009, and to take appropriate action, in accordance with law, with regard to the alleged encroachments made by the petitioner, in accordance with the procedures established by law, within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. With the above observations, this Writ petition is disposed of. Sd/ Asst.Registrar /true copy/ Sub Asst.Registrar arr To 1. The Commissioner Corporation of Chennai Rippon Building Chennai- 600 003. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2. The Assistant Commissioner Corporation of Chennai For division 127, Rippon Building Chennai – 600 003 3. The Junior Engineer, Division 127, Usman Road T.Nagar Chennai- 600 017 1 cc To Mr.V.Bharathidasan, Advocate, SR.5209 1 cc To Mr.S.Rameshkumar, Advocate, SR.4743 Writ Petition No.12369 of 2009 AKR(CO) sra 03.02.2010 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/