Madras High Court Weekly Round-Up: January 26 to February 01, 2026

Citations: 2026 LiveLaw (Mad) 42 To 2026 LiveLaw (Mad) 51 NOMINAL INDEX P Mangaiyarkkarasi v. The Registrar General and Others, 2026 LiveLaw (Mad) 42 A Sarath v. The Commissioner and Others, 2026 LiveLaw (Mad) 43 Central Board of Film Certification and another v. KVN Productions LLP, 2026 LiveLaw (Mad) 44 G Thirukalyanamalar v State Bank of India and Others, 2026 LiveLaw (Mad) 45 P Balasubramaniyam v. The Principal Secretary to Government and Others, 2026 LiveLaw (Mad) 46 Murugammal and Others v. State of Tamil Nadu, 2026 LiveLaw (Mad) 47 Ponmudi v. The District Collector and Others, 2026 LiveLaw (Mad) 48 H Vennila v. State and Others, 2026 LiveLaw (Mad) 49 V v. The State of Tamil Nadu, 2026 LiveLaw (Mad) 50 A.V.B.Prabhu v. The Secretary to Government and Others, 2026 LiveLaw (Mad) 51 REPORT Can't Deny Maternity Benefit For Third Pregnancy Of Public Servants: Madras High Court Reiterates Case Title: P Mangaiyarkkarasi v. The Registrar General and Others Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Mad) 42 The Madras High Court has reiterated that the benefit of maternity leave should be extended to government servants even for their third pregnancy. The bench of Justice R Suresh Kumar and Justice Shamim Ahmed also commented that, though similar orders have been passed by the Supreme Court and the high court repeatedly, the authorities failed to understand the intent of the previous orders. The court thus directed the High Court registry to circulate the order to all judicial officers heading the District Judiciary throughout the state to ensure stricter compliance. The court also directed the Chief Secretary to strictly adhere to the principles previously laid down by the court and communicate the order to the Secretaries of Government and Heads of departments for strict compliance. Encroachment Can't Be Permitted On Public Street Even If It Has Religious Character: Madras High Court Case Title: A Sarath v. The Commissioner and Others Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Mad) 43 The Madras High Court recently observed that encroachment, even if having a religious character, cannot be permitted on a public place or land vested with the local body. The court added that it is the duty of the Municipal Commissioner to remove the encroachment after due notice. Justice V Lakshminarayana thus ordered the removal of a shrine of Mother Velankanni that had been installed in a public road. Commenting that a road or street does not have religious character, the court noted that, irrespective of the nature of the superstructure, the encroachment had to be removed. Madras High Court Sets Aside Single Bench Direction To Certify 'JanaNayagan' Movie; Directs Fresh Hearing Case Title: Central Board of Film Certification and another v. KVN Productions LLP Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Mad) 44 The Madras High court, on Tuesday (27th January) set aside an order of the single judge directing the Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC) to grant U/A certificate for Vijay's Jana Nayagan movie. The bench of Chief Justice Manindra Mohan Shrivastava and Justice G Arul Murugan, however, sent the matter back to the single judge for fresh consideration, noting that the natural justice principles were not followed. The single bench has been directed to decide the matter afresh after giving an opportunity to the CBFC to respond. The producer KVN Productions has also been given liberty to amend the writ petition. Non-Citizens Can File Writ Petition Against Arbitrary State Action: Madras High Court Sets Aside SBI's Termination Of Sri Lankan National Case Title: G Thirukalyanamalar v State Bank of India and Others Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Mad) 45 The Madras High Court has recently observed that a non-citizen can also file a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution challenging a State action if the same is allegedly arbitrary, making unreasonable discrimination and results in violation of rights guaranteed under Article 14 and 21 of the Constitution. Justice Hemant Chandangoudar also noted that the rehabilitation scheme for Sri Lankan Tamil refugees provides for benefits such as shelter, education, and employment in India, particularly in the State of Tamil Nadu. The court thus opined that the State Bank of India's action, in denying employment opportunity to an otherwise eligible candidate, merely on the ground that she was a Sri Lankan national was discriminatory and violative of Article 14 of the Constitution. "No End To Multiplication Of Cases In Family Disputes": Madras High Court Fines Father-In-Law For Filing Writ To Wreak Vengeance Case Title: P Balasubramaniyam v. The Principal Secretary to Government and Others Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Mad) 46 The Madras High Court recently lamented the institution of multiple cases in family disputes and commented that instead of approaching the Family Courts to...

Madras High Court Weekly Round-Up: January 26 to February 01, 2026

Upasana Sajeev

Tags