Dr.G.R.Rajashree, v. Chennai Metropolitan
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 25.01.2023
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N. SATHISH KUMAR 1.Dr.G.R.Rajashree 2.S.K.Srinivasan
...Petitioners
Vs.
1.Chennai Metropolitan Development Authority Rep by its Member Secretary No.1, Gandhi Irwin Road Egmore, Chennai-600 008 2.The Commissioner Corporation of Chennai Ripon Buildings Chennai 3.Assistant Engineer/ Assistant Executive Engineer Town Planning Approval Section Regional Office south Corporation of Chennai No.115, Dr. Muthu Lakshmi Salai Adyar Chennai-600 020
4.The Salt Corporation of India rep by its Deputy Commissioner II floor, II Block Shastri Bhavan No.26, Haddows road Chennai-6 R4- suo motu impleader as per order dated 29.07.2016 by NKKJ ..Respondents PRAYER: Writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records of the 3rd respondent ending with his order dated 17.12.2015 vide reference No.W.D.C No.T.P.PPA/WDCN 15/06615/2015 and quash the same and direct the 3rd respondent to accord planning permission based on the petitioner's application for planning permission dated 24.10.2015. For Petitioner : Mr.V.S.Venkatesh For Respondents : Mr.Y.Bhuvaneshkumar for R1 Mrs.P.T.Ramadevi for R2 and 3 Mr.G.Ilangovan for R4
O R D E R
Writ Petition has been filed challenging the order passed by the 3rd respondent rejecting the planning permission on the ground that land use map, the plot falls under non-urban use zone in 2nd master plan as per
Development Regulation No.22(1)A, construction of new residential building shall not be permitted in non urban use zone.
2. It is the grievance of the petitioner that out of 169 plots except these two plots all other plots the plan has been sanctioned by the Corporation. Now the petitioners application has been rejected on the ground it has been classified as non urban use zone in 2nd master plan. According to him when the similarly situated that plots are already sanctioned by the CMDA, the rejection in respect of the petitioner application itself is nothing but arbitrary and indiscrimination.
3. In the last hearing, this Court has directed the 1st respondent to file a status report. The status report has been filed. In para 5, it is stated that layout proposal was approved vide PPD/LO No.53/2004 in this office letter No.L1/38641/2003 dated 14.05.2004 in favour of the Special ifficer Karthikeyapuram Co-operative housing Society Limited. The said layout consists of 169 regular plots, 18 public purpose plots and a convenient shop plot. In para 6 it is stated that plot Nos.168& 169 lying in the said approved layout PPD/Lo No.53/2004 sanctioned y CMDA are residential
plots wherein the proposed residential activity can be approved by the local body as the lands were already reclassified into primary residential zone.
4. In such view of the specific stand taken by the CMDA, that residential activity can be approved by the local body, the counsel appearing for the 2nd respondent would submit that they will consider the application of the petitioner and grant permission.
5. In such view of the matter, as the matter has got delayed for many years, the petitioner's application shall be considered and permission shall be granted within a period of one month as per law.
6. With the above directions, the Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs.
25.01.2023 kpr Internet:Yes Speaking/non-speaking order
To 1.The Member Secretary Chennai Metropolitan Development Authority No.1, Gandhi Irwin Road Egmore, Chennai-600 008 2.The Commissioner Corporation of Chennai Ripon Buildings Chennai 3.Assistant Engineer/ Assistant Executive Engineer Town Planning Approval Section Regional Office south Corporation of Chennai No.115, Dr. Muthu Lakshmi Salai Adyar Chennai-600 020 4.The Deputy Commissioner Salt Corporation of India II floor, II Block Shastri Bhavan No.26, Haddows road Chennai-6
N. SATHISH KUMAR, J.
kpr 25.01.2023