v.

Sub.Appl(O.S.) No.465 of 2017 in Contempt Petition No.503 of 2015 T.S.SIVAGNANAM,J AND V.BHAVANI SUBBAROYAN,J (Order of the Court was made by T.S.SIVAGNANAM,J) Pursuant to the directions issued by us on 21.03.2019, Mr.P.N.Sridhar, I.A.S., Regional Deputy Commissioner (Central), Greater Chennai Corporation has filed status report and he is also present in the Court and assisted us in the decision making process.

2. The learned Additional Advocate General appearing for the respondent/Corporation has invited us through the averments made in the report filed by the respondent/corporation and submitted that the encroachments have been removed. It is further submitted that there is a proposal for road widening and earmarking has taken place and appropriate steps to be taken to acquire the land on either side of the road so as to widen the road. The allegation made by the petitioner more particularly in the affidavit filed in support of Sub Application No.465 of 2017 is that under the guise of removal of encroachment, all that has been done is to virtually remove the pavement on either side and make it appear as if the encroachments have been removed. Further it is alleged that the shop owners are still retaining the show cases in the road.

http://www.judis.nic.in

T.S.SIVAGNANAM,J AND V.BHAVANI SUBBAROYAN,J mrm

3. There is one other allegation which is found to be very serious that is with regard to the bogus patta granted to the owners of the properties on the either side of the road. It is the averment made by the petitioner in paragraph 20 of the affidavit in support of the Sub Application that already a survey was conducted, measurements were taken and the encroached area have been specified with arrow marking. This aspect needs to be thoroughly and effectively enquired into and if found to be correct, necessary corrective action should be immediately taken. We have therefore requested the Regional Deputy Commissioner, Central, Greater Chennai Corporation to conduct an inspection and in the said inspection, the Officials of Revenue Department, more particularly, the Tahsildar of the concerned area namely Perambur and Aynavaram Taluk and the Surveyor etc., should be present and the petitioner and his counsel be also notified to be present at the time when inspection is conducted. Upon such inspection a report be filed before this Court on the next hearing date.

4. List the matter on 14.06.2019.

(T.S.S.J.) (V.B.S.J.) 26.04.2019 mrm Sub.Appl(O.S.) No.465 of 2017 in Contempt Petition No.503 of 2015 http://www.judis.nic.in