In the light of the above discussions, this Court is inclined to interfere with the impugned Government Order in G.O.Ms.No.22 dated 26.1.2024 in so far as it gives the retrospective effect from 21.1.2022 is concerned and thereby Clause 8 of G.O.Ms.No.22 dated 26.1.2024 is hereby set aside. As a consequence, the cancellation of allotment made to the petitioners through G.O.Ms.No.51 dated 04.3.2024 is also quashed in so far as the petitioners are concerned. There shall be a direction to the respondents to confirm the respective allotment made in favour of the petitioners vide proceedings of the third respondent dated 28.7.2023. The entire process shall be completed within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 17. The writ petitions are allowed in the above terms. No costs. Consequently, the connected WMPs are closed. 28.7.2025 Index : Yes Neutral Citation : Yes To 1.The Secretary to Government, Tamil Development & Information, Department, Fort St.George, Chennai-9. 2.The Director, Tamil Development Department, Tamil Campus, Egmore, Chennai-8. 3.The Managing Director, Tamil Nadu Housing Board, CMDA, Koyambedu, Chennai-107. RS N.ANAND VENKATESH,J RS W.P.Nos.1559 & 24429 of 2025 &WMP.Nos.1791, 1792, 27510, 27513 & 27514 of 2025 28.7.2025
2025:MHC:1836
In the High Court of Judicature at Madras Dated : 28.7.2025
Coram :
The Honourable Mr.Justice N.ANAND VENKATESH
Writ Petition Nos.1559 & 24429 of 2025 &
WMP.Nos.1791, 1792, 27510, 27513 & 27514 of 2025
Mrs.G.Thilagavathy, IPS
…Petitioner in
WP.No.1559 of
2025
Mr.Ilakkuvanar Maraimalai
Vs
1.The Secretary to Government,
Tamil Development & Information, Department, Fort St.George, Chennai-9.
2.The Director, Tamil Development Department, Tamil Campus, Egmore, Chennai-8.
3.The Managing Director,
Tamil Nadu Housing Board,
CMDA, Koyambedu,
…Petitioner in
WP.No.24429 of
2025
Chennai-107.
…Respondents in both WPs
PETITIONS under Article 226 of The Constitution of India praying
for the issuance of
(i) a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records pertaining to the impugned G.O.Ms.No.22 dated 26.1.2024 Tamil Development and Information (Tha.Va.1.2) Department and the
consequential order of cancellation of Kanavu Illam in respect of the petitioner vide G.O.Ms.No.51 Tamil Development and Information (Tha.Va.1.2) Department dated 04.3.2024 on the file of the 1st
respondent, quash the same in respect of the cancellation of allotment to the petitioner and direct the respondents to confirm the allotment to the petitioner the flat in No.474/16 in Anna Nagar, Chennai Vide proceedings dated 28.7.2023 in No.O.Thu.1.7/7375/ 2021 on the file of the 3rd respondent under the Scheme of Kanavu Illam based on her eligibility of being a recipient of ‘Sahitya Akademi Award’ (WP.No.
1559 of 2025); and
(ii) a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records pertaining to the impugned G.O.Ms.No.22 dated 26.1.2024 Tamil Development and Information (Tha.Va.1.2) Department and the
consequential order of cancellation of Kanavu Illam in respect of the petitioner vide G.O.Ms.No.51 Tamil Development and Information (Tha.Va.1.2) Department dated 04.3.2024 on the file of the 1st
respondent, quash the same in respect of the cancellation of allotment to the petitioner and direct the respondents to confirm the allotment to the petitioner the Flat in No.476/1 in Shenai Nagar, Aminjikarai, Chennai vide Proceedings dated 28.7.2023 in No.O.Thu.1.7/7375/
2021 on the file of the 3rd respondent under the Scheme of Kanavu
Illam based on his eligibility of being a recipient of ‘Sahitya Akademi Award’ (WP.No.24429 of 2025).
For Petitioner in
both WPs : Rev.Father Xavier Arulraj, SC for M/s.Father Xavier Associates
For R1 & R2 in
both WPs : Mr.P.S.Raman, AG
assisted by
Mr.E.Veda Bagath Singh, SGP
For R3 in
both WPs : Mr.D.Veerasekaran,
Standing Counsel
COMMON ORDER
The issue involved in both the writ petitions is common and hence, they are taken up together, heard and disposed of by this
common order.
2. The petitioners have challenged G.O.Ms.No.22 dated
26.1.2024 and the consequential order passed in G.O.Ms.No.51 dated 04.3.2024 cancelling the allotment made in favour of them and for a direction to the respondents to confirm the respective allotment made in favour of the petitioners vide proceedings dated 28.7.2023 issued
by the third respondent.
3. The facts leading to filing of these writ petitions are as
follows:
(i) The petitioner in W.P.No.1559 of 2025 is a prolific writer and researcher of Tamil language, culture and history. For her novel named “Kalmaram”, she was conferred with Sahitya Akademy Award in the year 2005. That apart, she also won the award in the year 1988-89 for her stories. She is a retired IPS Officer and has attained the age of
superannuation as the Additional Director General of Police.
(ii) The petitioner in W.P.No.24429 of 2025 is a Tamil scholar and Professor Emeritus, Department of Tamil, Presidency College, Chennai. He has written nearly 17 books and is a recipient of Kalaignar
Chemmozhi Award in the year 2015, Thiru Vi Ka Award in the year 2017 and Navalar Thagaisal Award in the year 2022.
(iii) The Government of Tamil Nadu launched a scheme named
as Kanavu Illam on the occasion of 97th birthday of the former Chief Minister Dr.M.Karunanithi, specially to honour Tamil scholars by allotting a house for those, who received outstanding awards such as Jnana Peeth award, Sahitya Akademy award, national or State level literary awards or international awards, etc. As per G.O.Ms.No.12 dated 21.1.2022, the second respondent issued a circular dated 28.2.2022 calling upon the eligible persons to apply with due credentials. At that point of time, even those persons, who already
owned a house property, could apply for the same.
(iv) Later, vide G.O.Ms.No.184 dated 16.11.2022, 10 persons including the petitioners were selected as beneficiaries for the year 2022-23. The house at Anna Nagar was identified in so far the petitioner in W.P.No.1559 of 2025 is concerned. The house at Shenoy Nagar was identified in so far as the petitioner in W.P.No.24429 of 2025 is concerned. While so, the first respondent issued G.O.Ms.No.22 dated 26.1.2024 modifying the norms for selection and cancelled the
earlier allotment made to the petitioners nearly after two years.
(v) The said Government Order in G.O.Ms.No.22 dated
26.1.2024 was given effect to retrospectively with effect from
21.1.2022. Pursuant to that, G.O.Ms.No.51 dated 04.3.2024 was issued cancelling the allotments made in favour of the respective petitioner. Aggrieved by that, the above writ petitions have been filed
before this Court.
4. The first respondent filed a counter affidavit for himself and on
behalf of the second respondent wherein they took the following stand:
The first respondent justified the issuance of the impugned Government Orders on the ground that those persons, who already owned a house property, could not be allotted one more property. G.O.Ms.No.22 dated 26.1.2024 has been issued keeping in mind the spirit enunciated in G.O.Ms.No.12 dated 21.1.2022 and at the same time, by maintaining the conditions for allotment of the house/flat from the Tamil Nadu Housing Board (TNHB) that were in existence prior to 21.1.2022 where an applicant of a housing board scheme should not own a house/house site/flat in any municipal corporation, special grade or A grade municipality, township, town panchayats in Tamil Nadu and in any of the housing schemes of the TNHB anywhere in Tamil Nadu either in his/her name or in the name of the spouse or minor children. This order was made applicable to all short-listed beneficiaries without any discrimination. Ultimately, they sought for dismissal of these writ petitions.
5. The third respondent filed a counter affidavit wherein he stated that he acted upon the Government Orders issued by the first
respondent and therefore, the grounds that were raised by
respondents 1 and 2 in their counter have been virtually adopted by
the third respondent.
6. This Court has carefully considered the submissions of the learned counsel on either side and perused the materials available on
record and more particularly the impugned orders.
7. The short issue that arises for consideration in these writ petitions is as to whether a benefit that was conferred on the petitioners in line with the existing Government Order can be taken away through a subsequent Government Order by giving retrospective
effect.
8. At the outset, this Court must first take note of the language employed in G.O.Ms.No.12 dated 21.1.2022 wherein Clause 3(iv) is
extracted as follows :
“fdT ,y;yk; jpl;lk; tpUjpwf;hfj;jhd; vdW; KbT nraa; NtzL;k;. tpUjhsh;f;F myy; tpUjpwF; vDkN;ghJ Vw;fdNt tpUjhshf;s; tPL itj;jpUe;jhYk; mJ kw;nwhU tPlil; ngWtjwF; jilahf
,Uff;f;$lhJ.”
9. It is made clear from the above extracted portion that the house was allotted not for the awardee, but for the award that was received by persons, who have contributed to Tamil language, culture and history. The entitlement of the petitioners to receive the allotment is not in question since they satisfied the requirement under Clause 3(iv). The petitioner in W.P.No.1559 of 2025 is a recipient of Sahitya Akademy award in the year 2005 and the petitioner in W.P.No. 24429
of 2025 is a recipient of Kalaignar Chemmozhi award in the year 2015.
10. The petitioners were informed through the communication dated 27.5.2022 that they could go and select one of the properties that had been identified in different places. Accordingly, the petitioner
in W.P.No.1559 of 2025 chose the property at Anna Nagar and the petitioner in W.P.No.24429 of 2025 chose the property at Shenoy Nagar. Ultimately, G.O.Ms.No.184 dated 16.11.2022 came to be issued confirming the allotment of the respective property in favour of the petitioners and their names also find a place in S.Nos.1 and 5
respectively.
11. The entire controversy arose by virtue of the subsequent Government Order in G.O.Ms.No.22 dated 26.1.2024, which has been put to challenge in these writ petitions. The relevant portions in G.O.Ms.No.22 dated 26.1.2024 are extracted as hereunder :
‘jpUjj;k-;1 tpUjhshf;s; Vwf;dNt nrhe;jkhf tPL itj;jpUe;jhYk; fdT ,y;yk; jpl;lj;jpd;fPo; kw;nwhU tPlil; ngwyhk;. vdpDk;> tpUjhsNuh myy;J mthpd; fzth;/ kidtp muR tpUgG;hpikj; jpl;lk; cl;gl Vida jkpoeh; L tPl;Ltrjp thhpa jpl;lk; (myy;J) muR/muR epWtdk; (myy;J) khtl;l Mlr;pah; %ykhf mLfF;khb FbapUg;G (flat) my;yJ kid (pplot) my;yJ jdptPlb;id rYif tpiyapNyh my;yJ tpiyapd;wpNah my;yJ re;ij tpw;gid tpiyapNyh Vw;fdNt ngw;wpUgg;pd; ,j;jpl;lj;jpd;fPo; gadhspahf Njh;T nra;a ,ayhJ.
……
3(iv)(b) : tpUjhsNuh my;yJ mthpd; fzth;/kidtp muR tpUgG;hpikj; jpl;lk; cl;gl Vida jkpo;ehL tPl;Ltrjp thhpa jpl;lk; (my;yJ) muR/muR epWtdk; (my;yJ) khtll; Ml;rpah; %ykhf mLf;Fkhb
FbapUgG; (flat) my;yJ kid (pplot) my;yJ jdptlPb;id rYif tpiyapNyh my;yJ tpiyapd;wpNah Vw;fdNt ngwtpy;iy vd;Wk;> ,j;jpl;lj;jpd;fPo; jw;NghJ toq;fgng; Wk; FbapUg;gpid tzpf Nehf;fj;Jld; gad;gLj;j mDkjpf;f khl;Nld; vdW;k; cWjpnkhop mspg;gJld; mtT;Wjpnkhopf;F khwhf elfF;k; gl;rj;jpy; murhy; Nkw;nfhs;sg;gLk; vtt;pj eltbf;iff;Fk; cl;gLtjhf
,j;jpl;lj;jpd;fPo; ,y;yk; Nfhhp tpz;zg;gpf;Fk; tpUjhsh; kw;Wk; mthpd; thhpRjhuhf;s; cWjpnkhop mspf;f Ntz;Lk.;
……
8. Nkw;Fwpg;gplL;s;sthW murhiz
(epiy) vz;.12> jkpo; tshr;;rp kw;Wk; nra;jp
(j.t.12)j; Jiw ehs; 21.01.2022-,y; gj;jp 3(iv)> 3(vi)> 3(ix)> 3(x)-,y; Nkw;nfhs;sgg;l;l jpUjj;q;fs; 21.01.2022 mdW; Kjy; eilKiwfF; tUfpwJ.”
12. The above Government Order, at paragraph 6(i), referred to G.O.Ms.No.56 dated 28.2.2011. That was the basis, on which, the modification was brought in G.O.Ms.No.22 dated 26.1.2024. G.O.Ms.No.56 dated 28.2.2011 stated that there could be no subsidy or concession under that Government Order for those persons, who
purchased the house in the open market from the TNHB.
13. It is not known as to why the subsequent Government Order in G.O.Ms.No.22 dated 26.1.2024 took away the object of the earlier Government Order, which spoke about the allotment for the award and not for the awardee. In the earlier Government Order, a house owned
by the awardee was irrelevant since what was seen was the
contribution made by that person for Tamil literature and the award
that was received by the concerned person was towards it.
14. To put it in simple terms, the Government wanted to honour Tamil scholars for their outstanding contribution to Tamil literature and therefore, the yardstick that was applied in G.O.Ms.No.56 dated 28.2.2011 for regular allotment should not have been applied to those persons, who contributed to Tamil literature. In any event, even if the Government wanted to change their policy, they should have given the impugned Government Order a prospective effect. But, a retrospective effect has been given from 21.1.2022 and thereby the awardees, who were already selected and allotted the properties, are now being
deprived of the same.
15. This would clearly fall foul of arbitrariness and there is no intelligible differentia to fix the cut off date as 21.1.2022 since the object sought to be achieved under G.O.Ms.No.12 dated 21.1.2022 is to honour Tamil scholars for their outstanding contribution to Tamil literature and whereas the object of G.O.Ms.No.22 dated 26.1.2024 has virtually brought it in line with the regular allotment of houses by
the TNHB under G.O.Ms.No.56 dated 28.2.2011. The impugned Government Order is liable to be interfered on the ground that the legitimate expectation of the petitioners has now been defeated by plucking away a honour that was conferred on them through a
subsequent Government Order by giving it a retrospective effect.
16. In the light of the above discussions, this Court is inclined to interfere with the impugned Government Order in G.O.Ms.No.22 dated 26.1.2024 in so far as it gives the retrospective effect from 21.1.2022 is concerned and thereby Clause 8 of G.O.Ms.No.22 dated 26.1.2024 is hereby set aside. As a consequence, the cancellation of allotment made to the petitioners through G.O.Ms.No.51 dated 04.3.2024 is also quashed in so far as the petitioners are concerned. There shall be a direction to the respondents to confirm the respective allotment made in favour of the petitioners vide proceedings of the third respondent dated 28.7.2023. The entire process shall be completed within a period
of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
17. The writ petitions are allowed in the above terms. No costs.
Consequently, the connected WMPs are closed.
28.7.2025
Index : Yes
Neutral Citation : Yes
To
1.The Secretary to Government,
Tamil Development & Information, Department, Fort St.George, Chennai-9.
2.The Director, Tamil Development Department, Tamil Campus, Egmore, Chennai-8.
3.The Managing Director,
Tamil Nadu Housing Board, CMDA, Koyambedu, Chennai-107.
RS
N.ANAND VENKATESH,J
RS
W.P.Nos.1559 & 24429 of 2025
&WMP.Nos.1791, 1792, 27510, 27513 & 27514 of 2025
28.7.2025
