S.Angamuthu v. The Director
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 21.04.2023 CORAM :
THE HON'BLE MR.T.RAJA, ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE AND THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY S.Angamuthu .. Petitioner Vs
1. The Director Town and Country Planning E & C, Market Road Koyambedu, Chennai.
2. The Deputy Director Town and Country Planning Kumaran Road, Tiruppur.
3. The District Collector Tiruppur, Tiruppur District.
4. The Commissioner Thirumuruganpoondi Municipality Tiruppur, Tiruppur District.
5. The Executive Engineer Tamil Nadu Generation and Distribution Corporation Limited, Tiruppur Distribution Circle Avinashi.
6. E.Kartikeyan .. Respondents Prayer: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking issuance of a writ of mandamus directing respondents 1 to 5 to take appropriate legal action as against the sixth respondent for illegal development/unauthorised construction of a commercial building comprised in S.Nos.57, 58, 57/3A1, 61/1A1, A2 situated at Rakkiyapalayam, Thirumuruganpoondi, Tiruppur District in view of the Form No.1 notice issued by the second respondent vide proceedings in Na.Ka.No.835/2023/Suatha, dated Nil.3.2023, and by considering his representation dated 10.12.2022.
For the Petitioner : Mr.K.Myilsamy For the Respondents : Mr.J.Ravindran Additional Advocate General assisted by Mr.A.Selvendran Special Government Pleader for respondents 1 to 3 : Mr.P.Muthukumar State Government Pleader for 4th respondent : Mr.L.Jaivenkatesh for 5th respondent : Mr.C.S.Saravanan for 6th respondent
ORDER
(Order of the court was made by the Hon'ble Acting Chief Justice) S.Angamuthu, son of Subramaniam, a resident of Kothapalayam, Semmandampalayam, Sulur Taluk, Coimbatore District, has filed this writ petition seeking issuance of a writ of mandamus to direct respondents 1 to 5 to take appropriate legal action as against the sixth respondent for illegal development/unauthorised construction of a commercial building in S.Nos.57, 58, 57/3A1, 61/1A1, A2 situated at Rakkiyapalayam, Thirumuruganpoondi, Tiruppur District in view of the Form No.1 notice issued by the second respondent vide proceedings in Na.Ka.No.835/2023/Suatha, dated Nil.3.2023, and by considering his representation dated 10.12.2022.
2. Mr.K.Myilsamy, learned counsel for the petitioner, would submit that the petitioner is a social worker and his grievance is that the sixth respondent, who owns the lands comprised in S.Nos.57, 58, 57/3A1, 61/1A1, A2 situated at Rakkiyapalayam, Thirumuruganpoondi, Tirupp8ur District, has constructed a commercial building in violation of the planning permission granted to him. He submitted that though the sixth respondent obtained permission for construction of stilt + two
floors, he built three floors and converted the stilt floor into ground floor. That apart, he pleaded that the construction put up by the sixth respondent is of more than 32000 sq.ft., much beyond the sanctioned limit. Ventilating his grievance, the petitioner sent a representation on 10.12.2022 to the respondent authorities. As the said representation did not evoke any response, the petitioner has been advised to file this writ petition.
3. Mr.C.S.Saravanan, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the sixth respondent, submitted that the sixth respondent has constructed a hotel in the name and style of "Annapoorna Hotel" over the land in question and the petitioner is not a social worker as claimed by him, but an employee of the rival hotel with the same name situate at Coimbatore. He further submitted that this writ petition has been filed by the petitioner at the instigation of the rival hotel and, therefore, it is not in public interest, but on account of professional rivalry between two hotels.
4. We find merit in the submission made by learned counsel for the sixth respondent. A bare perusal of the document filed at page
(58) of the typed-set of papers justifies the claim of the sixth respondent that the petitioner is an employee of the rival hotel in Coimbatore. A public interest litigation can only be entertained at the instance of a bona fide litigant and cannot be used by unscrupulous litigants to foster personal or individual grievance. In our considered opinion, the present petition is a motivated one founded on personal vendetta. On this score alone, this vexatious petition, styled as public interest litigation, brought for vindicating the personal grievance deserves to be rejected.
For the foregoing reasons, the writ petition is dismissed. There will be no order as to costs.
(T.R., ACJ.) (D.B.C., J.) 21.04.2023 Index :
No No sasi
To:
1. The Director Town and Country Planning E & C, Market Road Koyambedu, Chennai.
2. The Deputy Director Town and Country Planning Kumaran Road, Tiruppur.
3. The District Collector Tiruppur, Tiruppur District.
4. The Commissioner Thirumuruganpoondi Municipality Tiruppur, Tiruppur District.
5. The Executive Engineer Tamil Nadu Generation and Distribution Corporation Limited, Tiruppur Distribution Circle Avinashi.
THE HON'BLE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE AND D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY, J.
(sasi) 21.04.2023