(Order of the Court was made by The Hon'ble Chief Justice) Learned counsel for the petitioner initially sought to contend that the amount demanded by the respondent, the petitioner would be willing to pay, but then it is pointed out by the learned counsel for the CMDA that the issue is not of payment but whether the construction was completed before the cut-off date of 28.02.1999. In that behalf, we are informed, that an appeal by the erstwhile owner from whom the petitioner purchased is pending consideration. If that be the position, then the petitioner ought to exhaust the remedy as set out in the impugned letter dated 19.10.2016 itself, i.e. preferring appeal to the authorities concerned under Section 113 (A) (6) of the Town and Country Planning Act, 1971, read with Rules 7 and 8 of the Application, Assessment and Collection Regularization Fee (CMA) Rules, 1999.
2.Learned counsel for the petitioner, thus, seeks to withdraw the petition with liberty to approach the appellate authority. Endorsement is made.
Writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn in terms aforesaid. No costs.
(S.K.K., CJ.) (M.S., J.) 30.01.2017 Index : Yes/No Website : Yes/No sra To
1.The Member Secretary, Chennai Metropolitan Development Authority, No.8, Gandhi Irwin Road, Egmore, Chennai 600 008.
2.The Secretary, Government of Tamil Nadu, Housing and Urban Development Dept., Fort St. George, Chennai 600 009.
The Hon'ble Chief Justice and M.Sundar, J.
(sra) W.P.No.2042 of 2017 30.01.2017 http://www.judis.nic.in