Y.THAMOTHARAN Vs. COMMISSIONER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) I have heard Mr.R.Amardeep, learned counsel appearing on behalf of M/s.Tamizh Law Firm, learned counsel on record for the petitioner, Mr.S. Saravanan, learned Standing Counsel for the first respondent and Mr.B. Nedunchezhiyan, learned counsel for the second respondent.

(2.) The petitioner seeks to quash the impugned notice issued by the first respondent dated 18.4.2016.

(3.) In the impugned notice, it has been stated that the officials of the Corporation inspected the petitioner's building on 18.4.2016, that during the course of inspection, they found that the building is in a dilapidated condition unsafe for occupation and that it will be dangerous not only to the owner and the inhabitants of the building, but also to the neighbours, which includes the second respondent.