2026:MHC:3349 WA(MD)Nos.1243 and 1244 of 2026 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT Dated : 11.08.2026 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.V.KARTHIKEYAN AND THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R. SAKTHIVEL WA(MD)Nos.1243 and 1244 of 2026 and CMP(MD)Nos.10675 and 10678 of 2026 1.Vadivu ... Appellant/Petitioner in WA(MD)No.1243 of 2026 2.Mohamed Ali 3.K.N.Akbar 4.N.Mohamed Iqbal 5.Pichaimmal 6.G.Kannan ... Appellants/Petitioners in WA(MD)No.1244 of 2026 Vs The Commissioner, The Madurai City Municipal Corporation, Anna Maligai, Thallakulam, Madurai 625 002. ... Respondent/Respondent in both appeals COMMON PRAYER:- Writ Appeals filed under Clause 15 of Letters Patent Act, against the order passed by this Court in W.P.(MD)Nos.31533 and 31600 of 2025, dated 05.06.2026. 1/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis WA(MD)Nos.1243 and 1244 of 2026 In both appeals: For Appellant(s) : Mr.V.N.Arjun for Mr.N.Vallinayagam For Respondent(s): Mr.S.Vinayak Standing Counsel COMMON JUDGMENT (Judgment of the Court was made by C.V.Karthikeyan, J.) Both the writ appeals have been filed questioning a common order passed in two separate writ petitions, namely, W.P.(MD)Nos.31533 and 31600 of 2025, both of which were dismissed by the learned Single Judge by a common order dated 05.06.2026. 2.It is the claim of the appellants, who are the writ petitioners, that the respondent, Madurai Corporation, had invited bids for leasing out agricultural lands which vested with the respondent by an e-Tender auction/Tender Notification dated 23.10.2025. The appellants/petitioners claimed to be cultivating tenants in respect of the lands in S.Nos.102/3, 111, 113/1, 113/5, 143/1, 144/3, 154A, 174/2, 221/2 and 251/2 within the 2/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis WA(MD)Nos.1243 and 1244 of 2026 limits of the Madurai City Municipal Corporation. It is contended that the writ petitioners/appellants continued to be in occupation. The learned Single Judge had stated that the respondent Corporation had disputed the claim of the writ petitioners/appellants regarding possession and cultivation, observing that no document had been presented to establish either possession or cultivation of the lands. However, the learned Single Judge had not entertained the writ petitions, but granted liberty to approach the competent statutory authority for adjudication of their rights, including any claim of cultivating tenancy. 3.The learned counsel for the appellants stated that the notice should be issued to the appellants or that they must be granted an opportunity to pay the fair rent for the lands in which they are in occupation. Either way, there had been earlier civil suits filed in O.S.Nos. 355 of 1990, 389 of 1990 and 17 of 1991 and 19 of 1991, which came up for consideration before the Principal District Munsif at Madurai Taluk, wherein the relief sought was for a permanent injunction restraining the defendants therein, namely the Madurai City Corporation, from 3/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis WA(MD)Nos.1243 and 1244 of 2026 interfering with the peaceful possession. After trial, the rent to be paid for the possession had been determined, but it is not known whether the writ petitioners/appellants or their forefathers were parties in the said suits. It is for the petitioners to establish their rights before the appropriate authorities. It may not be possible for this Court to determine mixed questions or disputed questions of possession, disputed questions of the right to cultivation and disputed questions of the right to continue to be in possession by inheritance from the original cultivating tenants. 4.The learned counsel for the respondent stated that, for a period of four weeks, they would not initiate any coercive steps. 5.We would extend the same by stating that till 31.10.2026, the respondent should not take any coercive action. However, the appellants must initiate appropriate steps before the said date. If the appellants fail to take any appropriate steps or fail to get any appropriate orders, the respondent is at liberty to proceed further in the manner known to law. 4/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis WA(MD)Nos.1243 and 1244 of 2026 6.In view of the said reasons, these writ appeals stands disposed of, affirming the liberty granted by the learned Single Judge. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed. (C.V.K., J.) & (R.S.V., J.) sji 11.08.2026 NCC : Yes To The Commissioner, The Madurai City Municipal Corporation, Anna Maligai, Thallakulam, Madurai 625 002. 5/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis WA(MD)Nos.1243 and 1244 of 2026 C.V.KARTHIKEYAN, J. and R. SAKTHIVEL, J. sji WA(MD)Nos.1243 and 1244 of 2026 Date : 11.08.2026 6/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis