Viswa Bharathi College Of v. The Commissioner Of Town And

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 24.04.2015

CORAM:

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SATISH K. AGNIHOTRI AND THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M.VENUGOPAL W.P. Nos.12352 and 12355 of 2015 and M.P. Nos.1 and 2 of 2015 Viswa Bharathi College of Education represented by its Chairman and Secretary Veerachipalayam Sankari Post, Sankari (Tk) Salem District 637 303 Petitioner in WP No.12352/2015 Rabindranath Tagore College of Education for Women represented by its Chairman and Secretary Veerachipalayam Sankari Post, Sankari (Tk) Salem District 637 303 Petitioner in WP No.12355/2015 vs.

The Commissioner of Town and Country Planning O/o the Directorate of Town and Country Planning 807 Anna Salai, Chennai 600 002 The Deputy Director of Town and Country Planning Salem Region No.6, Sannadhi Street Subramanya Nagar Sooramangalam Salem 636 005 RR 1 & 2 in both the WPs Veerachipalayam Agraharam Village Panchayat represented by its President Veerachipalayam Agraharam Sankari (Tk.), Salem District 637 303 R3 in WP No.12352/2015 Alathur Village Panchayat represented by its President Alathur Sankari (Tk.), Salem District 637 303 R3 in WP No.12355/2015

Writ Petitions filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking a writ of certiorari, calling for the records of the respondents, relating to the orders of the first respondent in D.O. Roc No.9263/2012-UAC dated 21.07.2014 and the orders of the second respondent in Roc No. 1537/2014 SR-3 dated 13.02.2015 and quash the same.

For petitioner Mr. Kandhan Doraisamy in both the WPs for M/s. Muthumani Doraisami For RR 1 & 2 Mr. N. Sakthivel in both the WPs Government Advocate For R3 in Mr. M. Digvijaya Pandian WP No.12352/2015 For R3 in Mrs. M.E. Rani Selvam WP No.12355/2015 COMMON ORDER (Order of the Court was made by SATISH K. AGNIHOTRI, J.) Mr. N. Sakthivel, learned Government Advocate, accepts notice for respondents 1 and 2 in both the writ petitions. Mr. M. Digvijayapandian and Mrs.M.E.Rani Selvam, learned counsel, take notice for the respective third respondent. With the consent of the learned counsel for the parties, the writ petitions are taken up for final disposal, at the admission stage itself. These writ petitions are filed challenging the orders of the first respondent in D.O. Roc No.9263/2012-UAC dated 21.07.2014 and the orders of the second respondent in Roc No.1537/2014 SR-3 dated 13.02.2015, stating that in spite of opportunity having been given, the petitioner institutions have not submitted their approved plan and therefore, the buildings in question will be locked and sealed.

The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioner institutions are having approved plan granted by the competent authority/local body and based on the approved plan only, the buildings were constructed prior to 2010. The learned counsel relied on a Division Bench judgment of this Court in The District Collector and Others vs. Danial Thangaraj and another1 as well as the order of a learned Single Judge in Apesh Construction Ltd.2 vs. 2013 WLR 925 2013 (2) CTC 180

The Corporation of Madurai and an unreported judgment dated 15.06.2012 passed in W.P. No.11031 of 2011, in support of his contentions.

The impugned notices dated 13.02.2015 were passed based on D.O.Roc. No.9263/2012-UAC dated 21.07.2014, which is also impugned in this writ petition.

Since the petitioners/educational institutions are contending that they have obtained the approval plan from the competent local authority and the buildings were constructed as per the approved plan, it is open to the petitioners/educational institutions to submit their objections/representations qua the impugned notices dated 13.02.2015. It is stated by the learned counsel for the petitioners that the petitioners have already submitted their representations dated 19.03.2015. As referred to above, the impugned notices dated 13.02.2015 were issued based on the communication issued by the first respondent. Hence, the second respondent is directed to get a clarification from the first respondent, who is bound to clarify, to take further action in the matter, as the action initiated is based on D.O.Roc.No.9263/2012-UAC dated 21.07.

2014 issued by the first respondent. After receiving the said clarification, the second respondent is directed to pass a speaking order, on consideration of the petitioners' representations dated 19.03.2015, in accordance with law, within a period of one week. Needless to state that each and every submission averred by the petitioners in their representation is to be adverted to and a reasoned order is required to be passed. Till fresh orders are passed by the second respondent as stated supra, status quo as obtained today, in respect of the building of the petitioners/educational institutions, shall be maintained by both the parties.

These writ petitions are disposed of with the above direction and observation. No costs. Connected Miscellaneous Petitions are closed.

Sd/- Asst.Registrar (CS II ) /true copy/ Sub Asst. Registrar cad

To The Commissioner of Town and Country Planning O/o the Directorate of Town and Country Planning 807 Anna Salai, Chennai 600 002 The Deputy Director of Town and Country Planning Salem Region No.6, Sannadhi Street Subramanya Nagar Sooramangalam Salem 636 005 The President Veerachipalayam Agraharam Village Panchayat Veerachipalayam Agraharam Sankari (Tk.), Salem District 637 303 The President Alathur Village Panchayat Alathur Sankari (Tk.), Salem District 637 303 2 ccs to M/s. Muthumani Doraisami, Advocate, Sr., 22686 1 cc to Government Pleader, sr. 22926 1 cc to Mr.M. Digvijayapandian, Advocate, sR. 23394 W.P. Nos.12352 and 12355 of 2015 NM (cO) kk 5/5