M/S.Shriram Properties And v. The State Of Tamil Nadu
In the High Court of Judicature at Madras Dated: 29.07.2015 Coram:
The Honourable Mr. SANJAY KISHAN KAUL, Chief Justice and The Honourable Mr. Justice T.S.SIVAGNANAM Writ Petition Nos. 16287 of 2015 and 28577 of 2008 M/s. Shriram Properties and Infrastructures Private Limited New No.9, Bazullah Road T. Nagar, Chennai-600017 rep. by its Assistant Vice President (Projects) R. Radhakrishnan .. Petitioner in WP.No.16287/2015 M/s. Shriram Properties and Infrastructures Private Limited New No.9, Bazullah Road T. Nagar, Chennai-600017 rep. by its Chief Operating Officer Mr. R. Murugesan .. Petitioner in WP.No.28577/2008 vs.
1. The State of Tamil Nadu Rep. by its Secretary Housing and Urban Development Department, Fort St. George Chennai 600009.
2. The Member Secretary Chennai Metropolitan Development Authority No.1, Gandhi Irwin Road, Egmore, Chennai 600 008.
.. Respondents in both petns.
Prayer: W.P.No.16287/2015 filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issue of a Writ of Declaration declaring Rule 19 (b) III B of the Development Control Rules for Chennai Metropolitan Area as illegal, arbitrary, unconstitutional, unenforceable and ultra vires the provisions of Tamil Nadu Town and Country Planning Act, 1971, inasmuch as it relates to the demand of security deposit for development and Sewage Treatment Plant for the proposed development insofar as the petitioner is concerned and to consequently direct the 2nd respondent to issue planning permission on the application of the petitioner without insisting on payment of a
total sum of Rs.18,10,00,000/- as security deposit (Rs.17,60,00,000/- for the proposed development + Rs.50,00,000/- for the Sewerage Treatment Plant) in terms of letter No.C3(S)/20454/2013 on the file of the 2nd respondent.
W.P.No.28577/2008 filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issue of a Writ of Declaration declaring Rule 19 (b) III B of the Development Control Rules for Chennai Metropolitan Area and also Rule 7 of the Rules for Information Technology Park contained in Annexure XV of the Development Control Rules, as ultra view the Tamil Nadu Town and Country Planning Act, 1971, illegal, unconstitutional and unenforceable inasmuch as it relates to the demand of security deposit and caution deposit for the proposed development insofar as the petitioner is concerned, and to consequently direct the 2nd respondent to issue planning permission on the application of the petitioner without insisting on payment of a total sum of Rs.5,29,90,000/- as security deposit (Rs.4,41,50,000/- for the proposed development + Rs.88,40,000/- for the Sewerage Treatment Plant) and a sum of Rs.24,94,60,000/- towards caution deposit in terms of letter No.C3/958/2007 dated 18.11.2008 on the file of the 2nd respondent.
For Petitioner in : Mr. Balasubramanian W.P.No.16287/015 for Poovayya and Co. For Petitioner in : Mr. S. Ashok Kumar W.P.No.28577/2008 For Respondents : Mr. S.T.S. Murthi, Govt. Pleader in both assisted by Mr.V.R.Kamalanathan Addl. Govt. Pleader for R1 Mr. C. Johnson for R2 Mr. G.A. Baskara Rajan Senior Law Officer-CMDA COMMON ORDER (Made by The Hon'ble The Chief Justice) Counter-affidavits have been filed by both the Chennai Metropolitan Development Authority and the State Government.
2. In terms of the affidavit of the CMDA, in a Meeting held on 24.12.2014, a Resolution has been passed as under: "The Authority resolved to accept the Bank Guarantee in lieu of cash towards Security Deposit for the building, display board, STP, etc., provided the applicant to remit 9% of interest for the total BG amount for a period of 3 years (PP validity period) in cash along with the Bank Guarantee. The Authority further resolved to send necessary proposal to
Government for amendment of Development Regulations."
3. The counter affidavit of the State Government/first respondent in para 11 prays for two months' time to pass an appropriate formal orders in view of the request made by the CMDA/second respondent vide letter dated 23.06.2015, communicating the aforesaid Resolution.
4. We record the aforesaid statement and grant two months' time to do the needful.
5. Insofar as the present petitions are concerned, the same are disposed of as per the interim orders already passed which shall partake the character of the final orders on condition that the amount demanded under the Caution Deposit as well as the amount demanded under the Security Deposit is kept secured by the Bank Guarantees. The Bank Guarantee for Caution Deposit as per orders passed in Writ Petition No.5350 of 2006 has to be kept in force for a period of five years, while for Security Deposit, it has to be kept in force till the completion of the building. No costs.
6. Learned counsel for the CMDA states that a list of 43 other matters have been given to the Registry which are similar in character. Those writ petitions be also taken out and posted on one day.
Sd/- Assistant Registrar True Copy Sub Assistant Registrar ATR Copies to;
1. The Secretary State of Tamil Nadu Housing and Urban Development Department, Fort St. George Chennai 600009.
2. The Member Secretary Chennai Metropolitan Development Authority No.1, Gandhi Irwin Road, Egmore, Chennai 600 008.
1 cc to M/s.Poovayya and Co. , Advocate Sr.No.34201 1 cc to Government Pleader.Sr.No.38918 2 cc to Mr.C. Johnson , Advocate Sr.No.38961 W.P. Nos. 16287 of 2015 & 28577 of 2008 rv(co)pmk.11.8.2015