Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. Madras High Court
  4. /
  5. 2017
  6. /
  7. January

R.Senthil vs Assistant Director

Madras High Court|14 November, 2017

JUDGMENT / ORDER

(Order of the Court was made by M.SATHYANARAYANAN, J.) By consent, this Writ Petition is taken up for final disposal.
2. The petitioner, challenging the legality of the notice dated 14.07.2017 issued by the first respondent, came forward to file this writ petition. It is relevant to extract the building plan approval and the deviated construction: Main Building No.1 433.91 Sq.mts Additional Building No.2 26.60 Sq.mts Total 461.51 Sq.Mts (or) 462 Sq.Mts Main Building No.1 Area (Sq.Mtrs) Stilt 433.91 First Floor 433.91 Second Floor 60.00 Additional Building No.2 Stilt 27.60 First Floor 27.60 Total 983.02 Sq.Mtrs The petitioner, in response to the said notice, through his lawyer, has issued a notice under Section 80 of the Civil Procedure Code to the first respondent by enclosing the certificates and despite receipt and acknowledgment, he is yet to be favoured with any kind of response and apprehending lock and seal, the petitioner has filed this writ petition.
3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the deviation is only minimal in nature, which is within the condonable limits and he may be permitted to submit a representation explaining the remedial measures to set right the deviated construction or go for planning permission with regard to addition construction, in the event of the same falling within the condonable limit. Attention of this Court was also invited to the Planning Permission granted by the Irumbai Panchayat Union.
4. This Court heard the submissions of Mrs.M.E.Rani Selvam, learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the respondents 1 and 2 and Mr.A.Kumar, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the Member Secretary, Chennai Metropolitan Development Authority, Egmore, Chennai.
5. Though the petitioner prays for larger relief, this Court, in the light of the above facts and circumstances, permits the petitioner to submit a representation/necessary application to the first respondent, explaining as to the steps taken to set right the building within the ambit of the planning permission or any other course open to him under law by enclosing relevant authenticated documents within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and upon receipt of the same, the first respondent is directed to consider the same and pass orders on merits and in accordance with law within a period of four weeks thereafter and communicate the decision taken, to the petitioner and till such time, the respondents shall defer further decision in terms of the impugned notice dated 14.07.2017. It is made clear that till the disposal of the representation/application to be submitted by the petitioner, the petitioner shall not create any third party rights in respect of the property in question and shall not later it's physical features also.
6. This Writ Petition is disposed of accordingly. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
[M.S.N., J.] [N.S.S., J.] 14.11.2017 Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes / No jvm To
1.Assistant Director, Town and Country Planning, Villupuram Division, Villupuram, Villupuram District.
2.The Member Secretary, Chennai Metropolitan Development Authority, No.1, Gandhi Irwin Road, Egmore, Chennai-600 008.
3.The Secretary, Housing and Town and Country Planning, Secretariat, Fort St.George, Chennai-600 009.
4.The Director, Directorate of Town and Country Planning, Opposite to LIC, Chengalvarayan Building', Fourth Floor, 807, Anna Salai, Chennai-600 002.
M.SATHYANARAYANAN, J., and N.SESHASAYEE, J.
jvm W.P.No.23179 of 2017 14.11.2017
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.
Title

R.Senthil vs Assistant Director

Court

Madras High Court

JudgmentDate
14 November, 2017