M/S.Sri Ganapathy Silks v. The Commissioner Of
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 16.11.2016
CORAM
The HON'BLE MR.SANJAY KISHAN KAUL, CHIEF JUSTICE AND The HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE R.MAHADEVAN W.P.No.29231 of 2012 Sri Ganapathy Silks Sankarankoil Pvt. Ltd.
rep. by its Authorised Signatory, R.Venkatesan Son of V.Ramasamy 565-570, Oppanakara Street Coimbatore - 641 001.
.. Petitioner vs.
1. The Commissioner of Coimbatore City Municipal Corporation
2. The Deputy Director of Town and Country Planning Chennai.
3. The Local Planning Authority rep. by its Member Secretary (Incharge) .. Respondents PRAYER: Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a writ of Mandamus directing the 3rd respondent to process the application of the petitioner dated 24.12.2006, which has once again been renewed by the petitioner's letter dated 22.10.2012.
For Petitioner : Ms.P.T.Asha for M/s.Sarvabhauman Associates For Respondents : Mr.T.N.Rajagopalan Spl. Government Pleader for respondents 2 and 3 Mr.J.Sathyanarayana Prasad for 1st respondent
ORDER
(Order of the Court was made by the Hon'ble Chief Justice) The petitioner claims to have submitted a representation on 24.12.2006 for regularization of the fifth floor, which was not sanctioned as per the planning permission. The petitioner claims to have received no response. On 22.10.2012, a reminder is stated to have been sent enclosing all relevant documents. The petitioner in this time never approached the Court, but on receiving the notice dated 6.9.2012 from the third respondent/Local Planning Authority alleging violation of the plan, approached the Court.
2. We find there are two controversies that emerge: (i) Whether at all any application was submitted as alleged by the petitioner, since the benefit of the introduction of Section 113C of the Tamil Nadu Town and Country Planning Act, 1971 has been found to be illusionary in the absence of the rules and regulations, and (ii) If such application was submitted, the next question would be was it capable of regularization.
3. We, thus, direct the third respondent to take a decision on the request of the petitioner, after notice to the petitioner and on fresh inspection being caused to verify the current position. This exercise may be completed within three months from the date of receipt of the order and further action would depend on the fate of the decision.
The petition, accordingly, stands disposed of. No costs. Consequently, M.P.No.1 of 2012 is closed.
Sd/- Asst.Registrar (CS V ) /true copy/ Sub Asst. Registrar To:
1. The Commissioner of Coimbatore City Municipal Corporation
2. The Deputy Director of Town and Country Planning Chennai.
3. The Member Secretary (Incharge) Local Planning Authority +1 cc to M/s.Sarvabhauman associates, sr.66520 +1 cc to Mr.J.Sathyanarayana prasad,advocate,sr.66533 +1 ccto Government pleader,sr.66726 rsy(co) krd 29/11 W.P.No.29231 of 2012