Dr. S.R. Nirmal v. Tiruchirappalli City Municipal

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 17.08.2017

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.K.SASIDHARAN and THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.R.SWAMINATHAN W.P(MD)No.15071 of 2014 and M.P.(MD).No.1 of 2014 Dr.S.R.Nirmal .. Petitioner Vs.

1. Tiruchirapalli City Municipal Corporation represented by its Commissioner, Cantonment, Tiruchirapalli-620 001.

2. The Assistant Commissioner, Tiruchirapalli City Municipal Corporation, K.Abisekapuram Zone, Tiruchirappalli-620 018.

.. Respondents PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a Writ of Certiorari, calling for the records culminated in the notice dated 11.08.2014 in Na.Ka.No.F1/138/2013/K.Abisekapuraam passed by the 1st respondent and quash the same as illegal, unenforceable, ultravires without jurisdiction and pass such other suitable order, which are deemed fit and necessary in the nature and circumstances of the case. For petitioner : No appearance For Respondents : Mr.N.S.Karthikeyan

ORDER

[Order of the Court was made by K.K.SASIDHARAN, J.] The notice issued by Tiruchirappalli city Municipal Corporation, invoking Section 56(2A) of the Tamil Nadu Town and Country Planning Act, 1971, is under challenge in this writ petition, at the instance of the petitioner.

2.The factual matrix indicates that the petitioner obtained permission for construction of a residential building with an area of 3,800 Sq.ft. It is not in dispute that the petitioner constructed the building, which was much more than the sanctioned limit. The second respondent therefore, issued the impugned notice under Section 56(2A) of the Tamil Nadu Town and Country Planning Act, 1971.

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

3.The petitioner has come up with a contention that the application for regularisation is pending and as such, it would not be correct on the part of the Local Planning Authority to take enforcement action. We are not in a position to agree with the contention taken by the petitioner.

4.Section 56(2A) of the Tamil Nadu Town and Country Planning Act, 1971, clearly indicates that not-withstanding the pendency of any application under Section 49 or appeal under Section 79 or any litigation before a Court of appeal, it would be within the powers of the Planning Authority to take action for locking and sealing the premises.

5.Such being the legal position, the petitioner is not correct in his contention that till a decision is taken in respect of the application for regularisation, enforcement action should not be taken against the builder. We, therefore, do not find any reason to entertain this writ petition.

6.In the result, the writ petition is dismissed. No costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition is closed. Sd/- Assistant Registrar(P&A) /True Copy/ Sub Assistant Registrar To

1. The Commissioner, Tiruchirapalli City Municipal Corporation Cantonment, Tiruchirapalli-620 001.

2. The Assistant Commissioner, Tiruchirapalli City Municipal Corporation, K.Abisekapuram Zone, Tiruchirappalli-620 018.

+1cc to Mr.Shangar Murali, Advocate Sr.No.72817 +1cc to Mr.N.S.Karthikeyan, Advocate Sr.No.72988 NS VB/GT/SAR2/12/09/2017/2P/5C ORDER MADE IN W.P(MD)No.15071 of 2014 and M.P.(MD).No.1 of 2014 17.08.2017 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/