Chidambaranathan v. The District Collector
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 25.04.2025
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.LAKSHMINARAYANAN Writ Petition(MD)No.9095 of 2025 Chidambaranathan ..Petitioner Vs 1.The District Collector, Tirunelveli District, Tirunelveli.
2.The Deputy Director, Town and Country Planning, Tirunelveli, Tirunelveli District.
3.The Commissioner, Tirunelveli Corporation, Tirunelveli, Tirunelveli District.
4.The Inspector of Police, District Crime Branch, Tirunelveli, Tirunelveli District.
5.S.Godwin Sam 6.Selvi 7.Garolin Mercy 8.Kalayani ... Respondents Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Mandamus to direct the official respondents, namely, 1 to 4 to take appropriate action against 1/7
the respondents 5 to 8 for converting the residential building as Church and Prayer Hall in the name of `PRAISE OF FIRE MINISTRIES` in the property in T.S.No.8, T.S.No.14, T.S.No.2017 situated at Palayapettai, Tirunelveli District, by considering the petitioner's representation dated 15.02.2025. For Petitioner : Mr.S.Gokulraj For Respondents : Mr.S.Shaji Bino Spl. Govt. Pleader (for R1 to R3) Mr.M.Karunanith Govt. Advocate (for R4) Mr.S.Backiyamuthu (for R5 and R6)
ORDER
The petitioner seeks issuance of a Writ of Mandamus to direct respondents 1 to 4 to take appropriate action against respondents 5 to 8 for converting the residential building into a Church and Prayer Hall in the name of "PRAISE OF FIRE MINISTRIES" in the property in T.S.No.8, T.S.No.14, and T.S.No.2017 situated at Palayapettai, Tirunelveli District, by considering his representation dated 15.02.2025.
2/7
2. The simple case of the petitioner is that the respondents 5 to 8 are running a religious institution under the name and style of "PRAISE OF FIRE MINISTRIES" without getting permission from the appropriate authorities.
3. When the matter came up for admission, Mr.S.Shaji Bino, learned Special Government Pleader, took notice for the respondents 1 to 3, Mr.M.Karunanithi, learned Government Advocate, took notice for the fourth respondent, and Mr.Gnanaprakash on behalf of Mr.S.Micheal Heldon Kumar, appeared for the respondents 5 and 6.
4. I directed Mr.S.Shaji Bino to get instructions from the respondents 1 to 3 as to whether the religious institution had obtained permission from the authorities prior to establishing and operating the institution. Mr.S.Shaji Bino sought time for a counter, and the matter was adjourned at his request.
5. When the matter was called yesterday, Mr.S.Shaji Bino produced written instructions from the Joint Director, Town and Country Planning, Tirunelveli District, that the construction made by the private respondents is an not authorized one, and it does not conform to the requirements of the Town and Country Planning Act. I 3/7
pointed out to Mr.S.Shaji Bino that this is not in compliance with the order passed by this court on 03.04.2025 and called upon him for specific instructions as to whether the private respondents have obtained permission to establish and run the religious institution. He sought time. I posted the matter today.
6. Today, when I took up the matter, Mr.S.Shaji Bino, on instructions, reported that "PRAISE OF FIRE MINISTRIES" has not obtained permission to establish the religious institution in the aforesaid area. Mr.S.Backiyamuthu, who appeared today on behalf of the respondents 5 and 6, also submitted that prior permission had not been obtained.
7. Insofar as the building dedicated for the religious institution is concerned, appropriate permission has to be obtained under the Tamil Nadu Combined Development and Building Rules, 2019. If such permission is not obtained, the party is not entitled to use the building as a religious institution.
8. Since the respondents 1 and 3 and respondents 5 and 6 state that the permission has not been obtained, there shall be a direction to the respondents 1 to 4 to ensure compliance with the Tamil Nadu 4/7
Combined Development and Building Rules, 2019, or any other applicable laws that cover the religious institution.
9. Mr.S.Backiyamuthu states that the respondents 5 and 6 will file an appropriate application for the purpose of running the religious institution and, thereafter, they shall use the premises as a Church/Prayer Hall. He requested that liberty be granted to the respondents 5 and 6 to that effect.
10. Liberty is granted. In case, such an application is filed, the appropriate authority shall conduct an enquiry, hear any objections made and thereafter pass appropriate orders.
11. As the building has no permission, the official respondents shall ensure that the usage of the building as a Church / Prayer Hall is discontinued with immediate effect.
12. With the above directions, this writ petition is disposed of. No costs.
25.04.2025 NCC : Yes/No Index : Yes/No Internet:Yes skn 5/7
To 1.The Inspector General of Registration, Trichy District, Trichy.
2.The District Registrar District Registration Office, Pudukkottai, Pudukkottai District.
3.The Sub Registrar, Thirumayam Sub Registration Office, Thirumayam, Pudukkottai District.
6/7
V.LAKSHMINARAYANAN, J.
skn Writ Petition(MD)No.9095 of 2025 25.04.2025 7/7