Paul Devaraj Ahiah, v. The Member Secretary,

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT Reserved on : 29.08.2017 Pronounced on : 13.03.2018 CORAM :

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.K.SASIDHARAN and THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.R.SWAMINATHAN W.P(MD)No.10943 of 2013 and M.P(MD)Nos.1 of 2013 Paul Devaraj Ahiah ... Petitioner vs.

1.The Member Secretary, 11-A, Ramanpillai Street, Ramavarmapuram, 2.The Municipal Commissioner, Nagercoil Municipality, 3.The Director, Town and Country Planning, No.807, Anna Salai, Chennai - 600 002.

4.The District Collector / Chairman, Office of the District Collector, ... Respondents Prayer : Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for all the relevant records of the first respondent Notice No.18/2012 NLPA dated 14.06.2013 and quash the same and consequently direct the third respondent to grant planning permission to the petitioner for the revised plan pertaining to the construction of the building comprised in R.Sy.No.E-15/146, R.Sy.No.E-15/147 and R.Sy.No.E-15/148 situated in N.M.C Ward No.48 Victoria Press Road, Nagercoil, Nagercoil Village, Agastheeswaram Taluk, Kanyakumari District.

For Petitioner : Mr.S.Ramakrishnan for Mr.D.Christenson Jugunu For Respondents : Mr.M.Govindan, Spl.G.P. For RR1, 3 and 4 Mr.P.Aathimoolapandian for R2

O R D E R

(Order of the Court was made by G.R.SWAMINATHAN, J.) The petitioner questions the impugned proceedings issued by the Local Planning Authority, Nagercoil.

2.The case of the petitioner is that the building in question was put up only after obtaining approval from the Nagercoil Municipality.

3.The first respondent has filed a typed set of papers, in which the deviations in respect of the building in question has been set out in a tabulated format. The same is as under: Approval Details Violation Details Approval Present Sl.No Description of rule

Present

condition at site Viola tion District Municipal Building Rules, 1972 Ground + 1st floors 1.

11(4) 1/4th set back Not provided 100% Cellar + Ground + floors 15(2)(g) stair case ventilation Not provided 100% 2.

12-Parking provision Not provided 100% 14(1) 1/8 ventilation Not provided 100% 3.

15(1) stair case provision Not provided 100% 4.

14(3) set back provision Not provided 100% 5.

Location of site Special Building Rules 1.

F S.I. - 1.7500 2.34 400% 2.

Plot Coverage 50% 68.92% 120% 3.

Open space around 0.90 m 71% 4.

Front set back Not provided 100% 5.

Around atleast 3 mtr Not Provided 100% 6.

Parking Not provided 100% 7.

Fire NOC Not Provided 100% 8.

Road with 9m 5.50m 61%

4.The petitioner has not filed any rejoinder controverting the aforesaid allegations made by the authority with respect to the deviations committed by the petitioner.

5.We have heard the learned counsel on either side and perused the materials available on record.

6.The impugned communication merely calls upon the petitioner to remove the unauthorised constructions.

7.Though in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the petitioner has contended that the building was constructed after taking permission from the local planning authority, the deviations highlighted in the counter affidavit has not really been explained by the writ petitioner.

8.In any event, there is a statutory remedy available to the petitioner under Section 80(A) of the Tamil Nadu Town and Country Planning Act, 1971. The petitioner without resorting to the specific remedy available under the Act, has rushed to this Court and obtained an interim order.

9.The Hon'ble Supreme Court in Dipak Kumar Mukherjee Vs. Kolkatta Municipal Corporation (2013 (5) SCC 336) observed that illegal and unauthorised construction of buildings and other structures not only violate the Municipal Laws and the concept of planned development of the particular area but also affect various fundamental and constitutional rights of other persons. 10.The building in question is used by the public. It is a commercial building. Since the public are using the building, it must have a structurally sound building. There is nothing on record to see that the building was constructed in adherence to the safety standards. In any case, the local authority was correct in taking enforcement action. We are therefore of the view that there is no ground made out in this writ petition. We therefore dismiss the writ petition. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is also dismissed.

Sd/- Assistant Registrar(T&P) /True Copy/ Sub Assistant Registrar To 1.The Member Secretary, 11-A, Ramanpillai Street, Ramavarmapuram,

2.The Municipal Commissioner, Nagercoil Municipality, 3.The Director, Town and Country Planning, No.807, Anna Salai, Chennai - 600 002.

4.The District Collector / Chairman, Office of the District Collector, +1cc to M/S.D.Christenson Jugunu, Advocate SR.No. 55076 +1cc to Special Government Pleader, SR.No. 55716 Order made in W.P(MD)No.10943 of 2013 and M.P(MD)Nos.1 of 2013 13.03.2018 arul JM/JC/SAR 4/20.04.2018/4P/7C