← Library
Madras High CourtWP(MD)/2124/2025disposed of

M. Ramaraj v. The Deputy Director Of Town And Country Planning

2025-10-16Honourable Ms. Justice P.T. Asha8 pages

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 16.10.2025

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE P.T.ASHA and W.M.P(MD)Nos.1500 & 1502 of 2025 M.Ramaraj .. Petitioner Vs.

1.The Deputy Director of Town and Country Planning, Office of the Deputy Director of Town and Country Planning, Dindigul.

2.The District Collector / The President of the Dindigul District Green Committee, Dindigul, 3.The Assistant Director (Panchayats), Dindigul, 4.The Block Development Officer, Dindigul Union Office, 5.Seelapadi Village Panchayat, Represented by its President, Seelapadi,

6.The Panchayat Secretary, Seelapadi Village Panchayat, .. Respondents Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for issuance of Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records pertaining to the impugned order passed by the 2nd respondent vide impugned proceedings in Na.Ka.No.2775349/2024/Aa3 dated 06.01.2025 and quash the same as illegal and consequently directing the respondents to permit the petitioner to remove one palm tree standing in the midst of the road and consequently direct the 4th respondent to approve the application of the petitioner in No.QMHV3EX3 as forwarded by the 1st respondent in pursuance of the order passed by the 1st respondent vide his proceedings in ROC No.QMHV3EX3/2024/TCP dated 21.06.2024 within the period that may be stipulated by this Court. For Petitioner : Mr.C.Venkatesh Kumar for M/s.Ajmal Associates For R1-R4 : Mr.D.Sasikumar Additional Government Pleader

ORDER

This writ petition has been filed challenging the order passed by the 2nd respondent dated 06.01.2025 and to direct the respondents to permit the petitioner to remove one palm tree standing in the midst of the

road and consequently direct the 4th respondent to approve the application of the petitioner in No.QMHV3EX3 as forwarded by the 1st respondent in pursuance of the order passed by the 1st respondent vide his proceedings in ROC No.QMHV3EX3/2024/TCP dated 21.06.2024.

2. The case of the petitioner is that the properties in Survey Nos. 719/1B2, 719/4B and 719/5B2 measuring an extent of 98.8 cents situated at Seelapadi Village, Dindigul West Taluk, Dindigul District belongs to the petitioner. All the revenue records stand in the name of the petitioner. The petitioner made an application on 15.05.2024 seeking approval for forming a residential layout. Though the same was approved by the 1st respondent vide proceedings dated 21.06.2024, the 6th respondent refused to approve the same. Therefore, the petitioner filed W.P(MD)No.22541 of 2024 seeking a direction to the 5th and 6th respondents to dispose of his application in the light of the proceedings of the 1st respondent, dated 21.06.2024. By order dated 23.09.2024, the above writ petition was disposed of with a direction that the application be disposed of within a month.

3. By letter dated 18.10.2024, the Assistant Director of Panchayat recommended to the Block Development Officer to take appropriate action. While so, the 5th respondent vide his proceedings dated 20.11.2024, passed an order stating that his application was returned citing certain discrepancies and that as per G.O.Ms.No.232, Agriculture Welfare Department, dated 07.12.2021, the permission from District Collector is required to cut the palm tree. Consequently, the 6th respondent had passed proceedings dated 20.11.2024 stating that the owner of the property shall remove the palm tree at his own cost after obtaining permission.

4. Meanwhile, the petitioner filed W.P(MD)No.28412 of 2024 challenging the order of the 5th and 6th respondents dated 20.11.2024. This Court on 05.12.2024 passed an interim order directing the Panchayat President to forward a report noting down the number of palm trees to be removed to the District Collector and on receipt thereof, the petitioner was directed to submit an application for removal of the said

palm tree, and on receipt thereof, the District Collector was directed to dispose the said application.

5. The palm trees proposed for removal were earmarked and an application in this regard was also filed. On receipt of the same, the 2nd respondent passed an impugned order, rejecting the request of the petitioner for the reason that removal of the four earmarked trees may set a precedent and in the future, applications for the removal of other trees could also be submitted. Challenging the same, the petitioner is before this Court.

6. Heard the learned counsels on either side.

7. The reason given for the rejection is rather observed considering the fact that the palm tree is right in the middle of the layout road. Further, the same can be transplanted in the margin of the road or elsewhere. Further, the 6th respondent had directed the owner to remove the tree at his expenses by proceedings dated 20.11.2024. Therefore, the

two palm trees, which are shown in Page Nos.81 and 82 of the typedset of papers filed along with the writ petition, shall be transplanted by the Agricultural and Farmers Welfare Department at the cost and expense of the petitioner.

8. With the above direction, this Writ Petition stands disposed of. No costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petitions are closed. 16.10.2025 NCC : Yes/No Index : Yes/No Internet : Yes gbg To 1.The Deputy Director of Town and Country Planning, Office of the Deputy Director of Town and Country Planning, Dindigul.

2.The District Collector / The President of the Dindigul District Green Committee, Dindigul, 3.The Assistant Director (Panchayats), Dindigul,

4.The Block Development Officer, Dindigul Union Office, 5.The Joint Director of Agriculture Office of the Joint Director of Agriculture, Collectorate Campus, V.N.Valagam, Dindigul - 624001.

P.T.ASHA, J.

gbg 16.10.2025