(Order of the Court was made by M.Sundar, J.) The writ petitioner has filed this writ petition calling in question a notice dated 16.3.2017 bearing No.DN/33/2016 issued by the second respondent before us viz., the Assistant Executive Engineer, Unit-VIII, Zone-3, Chennai Corporation.
2. Heard Mr.T.S.Rajamohan, learned counsel for the petitioner.
3. Mr.V.C.Selvasekaran, learned standing counsel for the Chennai Corporation accepts notice on behalf of both the respondents.
4. We have also heard the learned standing counsel appearing for respondent Nos.1 and 2.
5. It is seen from the records that the impugned notice has been issued invoking the powers under Sections 56, 57 and 85 of the Tamil Nadu Town and Country Planning Act, 1971.
6. It is not in dispute that the second respondent has power to issue the impugned notice. Therefore, there is jurisdiction for the respondents to issue such a notice.
7. The contents of the impugned notice would reveal that the writ petitioner has been called upon to produce the sanctioned plan for the civil work/construction activity that is going on at the site. It is also seen from the impugned notice that the said notice has been issued after an inspection of the site.
8. The learned counsel for the petitioner would contend that the petitioner has not put up any construction and the work that is being carried out is in the nature of renovation.
9. Sitting in writ jurisdiction, based on the affidavits and the counter-affidavits, we cannot go into the said factual aspects. We refrain from expressing any opinion on that aspect of the matter, leaving it open in the light of the order which we propose to pass.
10. Both the learned counsel agreed that the impugned notice dated 16.3.2017 bearing No.DN/33/20-16 shall be treated as a show cause notice and the writ petitioner undertakes to give a written reply to the second respondent with supporting documents thereto within a fortnight i.e., on or before 20th April, 2017. The second respondent shall examine the same, pass a suitable order and communicate the same to the petitioner.
11. With the above said observation and direction, the writ petition is disposed of, leaving the parties to bear their own costs. Consequently, W.M.P.Nos.8937 & 8938 of 2017 are closed.
(I.B., CJ.) (M.S., J.) 06.04.2017 Index : No Internet : Yes bbr To: