Dr.S.M.Abdul Kadhar v. The District Collector

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 06.03.2024

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE D. KRISHNAKUMAR and THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.VIJAYAKUMAR S.M.Abdul Kadhar ... Petitioner vs.

1.The District Collector, Madurai.

2.The Commissioner, Madurai Corporation, Madurai.

3.Syed Sulthan Beevi @ Bashiriya Begum ... Respondents PRAYER : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents 1 and 2 to take immediate action to remove the illegal unauthorized construction being put up by the third respondent at No.8, Venkatachala Naidu Lane, Keelasanthaipettai, Madurai.

For Petitioner : Mr.M.Rajaraman For Respondent No.1 : Mr.N.Satheesh Kumar Additional Government Pleader For Respondent No.2 : Mr.K.Manisekaran 1/6

ORDER

(Order of the Court was made by D. KRISHNAKUMAR, J.) The petitioner has filed the present Writ Petition to direct the respondents 1 and 2 to take immediate action to remove the illegal unauthorized construction being put up by the third respondent at No.8, Venkatachala Naidu Lane, Keelasanthaipettai, Madurai. 2.When the matter was taken up for hearing today, learned counsel appearing for the second respondent Corporation would submit that the third respondent has obtained building plan approval from the authority concerned, however, there is a deviation in the construction and necessary action will be taken for violating the building plan approval in accordance with law.

3.At this juncture, it would be beneficial to refer the Judgment of the Division Bench of this Court in M.Rahamathunisha and others Vs. Commissioner, Greater Chennai Corporation, Chennai and another reported in [2022 (6) CTC 145], wherein the Division Bench of this Court has held as follows:

2/6

'19.Applying the parameters laid down by this Court as well as the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the decisions mentioned supra to the present case, wherein, the petitioners sought an interim order forbearing the respondent authorities from taking coercive steps, so as to enable them to rectify and restore the subject building in consonance with the permissible planning rules and regulations, within a period of six months, this court is of the opinion that the practice of putting up an illegal construction and subsequently seek for regularisation or rectification should not be encouraged as it would give a wrong impression that a building can be unauthorisedly constructed and later, defects could be rectified.

In such cases, the plea for regularisation or rectification should not be entertained either as a matter of course or routine and it should be considered sparingly and reasonably. If it is shown that an unauthorised construction has been put up, it should be ordered to be demolished, thereby indicating a strong warning signal to the perpetrators of such offences. It is trite law that the respondent authorities should take action for the services rendered to the public, whereas in the instant case, after so many litigations, at the instance of the complainant, who is the neighbour of the subject building, the officials have taken action in accordance with law.

In many cases, they failed to do so promptly and appropriately; and the completion certificate issued by the authorities is, without proper verification of the actual status of the building, whether there is deviation / unauthorised construction.'

3/6

4.Further, in order to curb the unauthorized constructions, the Government has constituted a High Level Monitoring Committee and issued G.O(2D)No.15, Municipal Administration and Water Supply (MA.1) Department, dated 01.03.2024. As per the said Government Order, the Committee shall monitor the inspection of the unauthorized buildings. 5.In view of the above, the second respondent is directed to take necessary action for removal of the deviated portion of the building in question, in accordance with law, after giving notice to the parties concerned. The said exercise shall be completed within twelve weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

6.With the above direction, the Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs.

[D.K.K.,J.] [R.V.,J.] 06.03.2024 NCC : Yes / No Index : Yes / No ps 4/6

To 1.The District Collector, Madurai.

2.The Commissioner, Madurai Corporation, Madurai.

5/6

D. KRISHNAKUMAR ,J.

and R.VIJAYAKUMAR,J.

ps ORDER MADE IN DATED : 06.03.2024 6/6