Madras High CourtWP/18410/2020disposed of

R.Iyappan v. The Secretary To Government,

2020-12-14Honourable Mr Justice M. Sathyanarayanan,Honourable Mr Justice P. Rajamanickam4 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED 14.12.2020

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.SATHYANARAYANAN AND THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.RAJAMANICKAM WP.NO.18410/2020 & WMP.NO.22813/2020 R.Iyappan .. Petitioner

Versus

1. The Secretary to Government Housing & Urban Development Department Secretariat, Fort St George Chennai 600 009.

2. The Commissioner Greater Chennai Corporation Ripon Building, Chennai 600 003.

3. The Assistant Engineer Corporation of Chennai Zone-15, Division-199 No.120, Rajiv Gandhi Salai Sholinganallur, Chennai 600 119.

4. The Executive Engineer Zone-15, Greater Chennai Corporation No.120, Rajiv Gandhi Salai Sholinganallur, Chennai 600 119.

5. The Assistant Executive Engineer Greater Chennai Corporation Unit - 44, Division-199, Zone-15 Sholinganallur, Chennai 600 119.

.. Respondents Prayer:- Writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of a writ of mandamus directing the 1st respondent to dispose of the petitioner's appeal/revision dated 28.10.2020 pending on the file of the 1st respondent within a stipulated time frame as prescribed by this Court.

For Petitioner :

Mr.R.Jayaprakash For R1 :

Mr.S.Kamalesh Kannan Government Advocate For RR2 to 5 :

Mr.M.Ganesan Standing counsel

ORDER

[Order of the Court was made by M.SATHYANARAYANAN, J. through Video Conferencing] (1)By consent, the writ petition is taken up for final disposal and is disposed of by this order.

(2)Mr.S.Kamalesh Kannan, learned Government Advocate accepts notice on behalf of the 1st respondent and Mr.M.Ganesan, learned Standing counsel accepts notice on behalf of respondents 2 to 5.

(3)It is alleged that the petitioner has put up an unauthorised construction of residential/commercial building at Plot.No.158, VGP Layout, 2nd Main Road, Uthandi, Chennai-199 and therefore, respondents 3 and 4 had issued the Locking, Sealing and Demolition Notice dated 04.09.2020. It is relevant to extract the deviations pointed out in the said Notice:- S.No Description As per approved Plan As on site Deviation Front Setback 5.42 0.00 5.42 Rear Setback 2.00 0.86 1.14 Side Setback [south] 2.00 0.60 1.40 Side Setback [North] 2.00 0.80 1.20 Total area of building 185.18 561.27 376.09 Height 8.50 9.00 0.50 Area at Ground Floor 27.05 187.09 160.04 Area at First Floor 84.60 187.09 102.40 Area at Second Floor 73.53 187.09 113.56

S.No Description As per approved Plan As on site Deviation Floor Space Index 0.71 2.52 1.81 Usage 37.15 84.89 84.89 No of Floor (4)The petitioner, challenging the same, filed appeal/special revision under section 80-A of the Tamil Nadu Town and Country Planning Act, 1971 [in short ''TCP Act''] along with a petition for stay u/s.80[A][[3] on 28.10.2020.

(5)The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that there is a likelihood of locking, sealing and demolition of the alleged offending construction and the petitioner filed an appeal/special revision dated 28.10.2020 before the 1st respondent and this Court may issue a positive direction, directing the 1st respondent to dispose of the petition for stay at the first instance and thereafter, the main appeal/special revision, at an early date.

(6)Mr.M.Ganesan, learned Standing counsel appearing for respondents 2 to 5 would submit that the petitioner, in brazen violation of the approved plan had put up an unauthorised construction and he is guilty of all violations and as such, action has been taken rightly in accordance with law and hence, prays for dismissal of this writ petition.

(7)Mr.S.Kamalesh Kannan, learned Government Advocate appearing for the 1st respondent would submit that there are lot of special revisions/appeals pending and since the appeal/special revision is of the recent origin, it may be taken up seriatimwise and if the papers are otherwise in order. (8)This Court has considered the rival submissions and also perused the materials placed before it.

(9)This Court, taking into consideration, the above facts and circumstances and without going into the merits of the claim projected by the petitioner either in his appeal/special revision or in this writ petition, directs the 1st respondent to entertain the appeal/special revision filed by the petitioner dated 28.10.2020 if the papers are otherwise in order and take up the petition for stay at the first instance and give a disposal in accordance with law within a period of three weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order/uploading of the order in the website. It is also open to the 1st respondent to accord priority and give a disposal to

the main appeal/revision itself.

(10)The writ petition stands disposed of accordingly. No costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition is closed. Sd/- Assistant Registrar(CS IV) //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar AP To