Svs Polytechnic College v. The Director
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 23.06.2015
CORAM:
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SATISH K. AGNIHOTRI AND THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M.VENUGOPAL W.P. No.17832 of 2015 and M.P. Nos.1 & 2 of 2015 SVS Polytechnic College, rep. By its Chairman Mr. V. Rathinam, Ramadevam (Post), Paramathi Velur Taluk, Namakkal District 637 207.
Petitioner vs.
The Director, Directorate of Town and Country Planning Anna Salai, Chennai 600 002 2 The Deputy Director O/o the Deputy Director of Town and Country Planning Salem Region Salem.
The President, Ramadevam Village, Paramathi Velur Taluk, Namakkal District 637 207.
Respondents Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking a writ of certiorari calling for the records in respect of the impugned order issued by the second respondent vide his proceedings in Roc.No.979/2011 SR-3 dated 08.08.2014 and quash the same.
For petitioner Mr. E. Vijay Anand For Respondents Mr. P.S.Sivashanmugasundaram Spl. Government Pleader
ORDER
(Order of the Court was made by SATISH K. AGNIHOTRI, J.) Mr. P.S. Sivashanmugasundaram, learned Special Government Pleader , takes notice for respondents. With the consent of the
learned counsel for the parties, this writ petition is taken up final disposal, at the admission stage itself.
This writ petition is filed challenging the notice dated 08..08.2014 issued by the second respondent in Roc.No.979/2011 SR-3, stating that in spite of opportunity having been given, the petitioner institution has not obtained the approved plan and therefore, the building in question will be locked and sealed. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner institution is 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 relies 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. vs. The Corporation of Madurai 2 and an unreported judgment dated 15.06.2012 passed in W.P. No.11031 of 2011, in support of his contentions.
In view of the contention of the petitioner/educational institution that it has obtained the approved plan from the competent local authority on 10.02.2011 and the buildings were constructed as per the approved plan, it is open to the petitioner/educational institution to submit its objection/representation qua the impugned notice dated 08.08.2014. It is stated by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner has already submitted a representation dated 30.04.2015.
In such view of the matter, the second respondent shall consider the petitioner's aforestated representation dated 30.04.2015 and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law and on merits, within a period of one week. Needless to state that each and every submission averred by the petitioner in its representation is to be adverted to and a reasoned order is required to be passed. Further, it is made clear that while considering the petitioner's representation, the authorities are at liberty to examine as to whether the said local authority had competence to grant approval prior to 2010 also. Till fresh orders are passed by the second respondent, as stated supra, status quo as obtained today, in respect of the building of the petitioner/educational institution, shall be maintained by both the parties.
2013 WLR 925 2013 (2) CTC 180
This writ petition is disposed of with the above direction. No costs. Connected Miscellaneous Petitions are closed. Sd/- Assistant Registrar True Copy Sub Assistant Registrar To The Director, Directorate of Town and Country Planning Anna Salai, Chennai 600 002 2 The Deputy Director O/o the Deputy Director of Town and Country Planning Salem Region, Salem.
The President, Ramadevam Village, Paramathi Velur Taluk, Namakkal District 637 207.
+1 cc to Mr.E.Vijay Anand, Advocate,SR.30940. Sai(co) krd 30/6 W.P. No.17832 of 2015