(Order of the Court was made by M.SATHYANARAYANAN, J.,) With consent of both parties, the Writ Petition is taken up for final disposal.
2. The petitioner, on an earlier occasion, in W.P.No.13497 of 2016 challenged the order of second respondent dated 15.03.2016, in and by which the appeal was rejected, in respect of construction of building at Survey Nos.156/1c, 1B, 1A2, 1A4 and 1A9 of Kannivakkam Village, Chengalpattu Taluk. A Division Bench of this Court by order dated 09.08.2016, passed in the said writ petition set aside the order dated 15.03.2016 and remanded back the matter to the second respondent / Appellate Authority, with liberty to the petitioner to substantiate his claim by producing genuine documents for plan approval.
3. The first respondent complied with the order and informed the petitioner by communication vide letter No.7470/UD4-1/2016-7, dated 05.10.2016, the decision to deseal the premises for a period of six months to facilitate the petitioner and the planning authorities to visit the premises for the purpose of providing plan approval with condition that no construction activity shall be initiated without obtaining plan approval from the competent authority. Any rectification required to be carried out should conform by the Development Control Regulations (DCR) norms and it shall be undertaken only after obtaining specific permission from the Regional Deputy Director of Town and Country Planning, Chengalpet. The petitioner was also directed to submit necessary affidavit in that regard.
4. The second respondent sent final notice dated 30.11.2016 indicating that the petitioner has proceeded with the construction in violation of the order of the letter of the first respondent dated 05.10.2006 and called upon him to stop the construction work forthwith and also to obtain plan approval, failing which, action will be initiated under Section 57 of the Tamil Nadu Town and Country Planning Act, 1971 by locking and sealing the premises.
5. Thereafter, the petitioner sent a representation dated 05.12.2016 to the second respondent denying the said averments.
6. The second respondent, vide letter dated 28.12.2016, called upon the petitioner to furnish certain particulars. In response to that, the petitioner submitted his reply dated 09.01.2017, once again reiterating that they are not putting up any further construction and will submit all the required documents within the time granted.
7. The petitioner also made a challenge to the notice dated 28.12.2016 issued under Section 56 and 57 of the Tamil Nadu Town and Country Planning Act, 1971 by filing appeal under Section 80(A) of the Tamil Nadu Town and Country Planning Act, 1971.
8. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has submitted that since the said appeal is pending, the petitioner has filed this writ petition for a direction to the respondents 2 and 3 to de-seal the premises and sought to forbear the respondents from interfering with the building and also demolishing the building in question. Pending disposal of the appeal, interim direction is also sought for directing the respondents 2 and 3 to deseal the premises.
9. This Court, while granting interim order dated 05.07.2017, directed the second respondent to deseal the premises and admit the petitioner to enter premises on 12.07.2017, with a further direction to the second respondent to mark the formation of inner road connecting to the approach road and after completing the process, the second respondent is also directed to file a report.
10. Accordingly, the second respondent has filed report dated 19.07.217, which is relevant to extract:
.......
3. It is humbly submitted that the writ petitioner herein formed layout at S.No.156/1A, 1B, 1A2, 1A4 and 1A9 of Kannivakkam Village, Chengalpattu District and sold plots to individuals and the individuals who in turn have entered in to agreements with the petitioner company for the construction of villa houses. It is hereby submitted that the writ petitioner has not obtained approval from the competent authority for plotting out the land into house sites, as such it is an unauthorized one. Further for the construction of the building no approval has been obtained from the competent authority. Also the title to the land as claimed by the petitioner company was also not genuine and fabricated one and hence criminal case was also registered against him and he was also remanded to judicial custody and the criminal case is pending.
4. It is humbly submitted that the writ petitioner filed an application for interim direction, directing the 2nd and 3rd respondents to forthwith deseal and remove the lock and seal affixed to the premises on 13.02.2017 in Survey Nos.156/1C, 1B, 1A2, 1A4 and 1A9 of Kannivakkam Village, Chengalpattu Taluk, pending disposal of the above main writ petition. The writ petitioner sought interim direction for marking the formation of an inner road connecting to the approach road. The Hon'ble High Court by its order dated 05.07.2017 directed the 2nd respondent to permit the petitioner to enter upon de-sealed premises on 12.07.2017 at 11.00 A.M. and directed to mark the formation of inner roads for connecting to the approach road.
5. It is humbly submitted as per the direction of the Hon'ble High Court, the respondent herein de-sealed the disputed site and made necessary marks for the formation of an inner road connecting to the approach road. The inner roads have been mark with a width of 9.0m as such the work was commenced on 12.07.2017 at 11.00 A.M. And completed on the next day (13.072017) in the presence of the petitioner and respondent / authority. The disputed premises was thereafter sealed on 14.07.2017........."
11. Mr.R.Vijayakumar, the learned Additional Government pleader, appearing for the respondents by filing counter affidavit of the second respondent submitted that the writ petitioner without obtaining the necessary plan and in violation of the undertaking deed dated 17.10.2016, started construction in the disputed property and his sole intention is to complete the illegal construction. Therefore, the second respondent issued proceedings dated 04.02.2017 and 27.01.2017, respectively calling upon the petitioner to stop the work and subsequently locked and sealed the premises in question.
12. By way of interim direction, the petitioner was permitted to enter upon the sealed premises and after complying with the interim direction, the second respondent filed report dated 19.07.217 and the learned Additional Government Pleader would submit that the inner roads have been marked with a width of 9.0m and as such, the work was commenced on 12.07.2017 at 11.00 am and completed on the next day i.e., on 13.07.2017 in the presence of the petitioner. Thereafter, it was sealed on 14.07.2017.
13. This Court considered the rival submissions and perused the notices. Admittedly, the petitioner has filed an appeal under Section 80(A) of the Tamil Nadu Town and Country Planning Act, 1971 and the same was rejected on 23.03.2017. In the light of the same, the question of directing the 2nd and 3rd respondent to deseal the premises does not arise at all. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the 1st respondent, vide communication dated 05.10.2016 directed the second respondent to deseal the premises for a period of six months to carry out necessary exercise. Though the petitioner has complied with the directions of the respondents, no final orders has been passed by the second respondent.
14. Considering the above facts, in the light of the subsequent rejection of the appeal under Section 80(A) of the said Act, by the first respondent on 23.03.2017, nothing survives for adjudication in this writ petition. However, if the petitioner is of the view that they have complied with the direction of the second respondent dated 28.12.2016 in Na.Ka.No.1693/2015/CR3, the petitioner is always at liberty to submit a representation to the second respondent to expedite the process of granting planning permission to construct the building in question and when such representation is received, the second respondent may entertain and dispose of the same in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible and communicate the decision taken, to the petitioner.
15. Writ Petition is dismissed with the above observations. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.