Disposed

Vishwanath Swami, v. Tamil Nadu Slum Clearance

Madras HC8 Jun 2015WP/10876/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The petitioner, an environment activist, filed a PIL challenging the construction of rehabilitation tenements by the State Government without prior environmental and forest permissions. The Court expressed displeasure at the authorities acting before obtaining sanctions, directed that construction could not proceed without completion of formalities, and awarded the petitioner Rs. 10,000.

What did the court decide?

Tenements not to be occupied until all formalities complete; Sanctions granted subsequently will not be questioned; Petitioner entitled to Rs. 10,000 compensation.

Vishwanath Swami, Vs Tamil Nadu Slum Clearance — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Madras HC (2015)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED : 08.06.2015

¶3

CORAM

¶4

The Hon'ble MR.SANJAY KISHAN KAUL, CHIEF JUSTICE AND

¶5

The Hon'ble MR.JUSTICE T.S.SIVAGNANAM

W.P.No.10876 of 2015

and

M.P.No.1 of 2015

Vishwanath Swami .. Petitioner -vs1.Tamil Nadu Slum Clearance Board (TNSCB), Coimbatore Division, rep. by the Executive Engineer, No.13-A, Arokiasamy Road – West, R.S.Puram, Coimbatore-641 002. 2.Directorate of Town and Country Planning (D.T.C.P), rep. by the Director – D.T.C.P., No.807, Anna Salai, Chennai-600 002. 3.Tamilnadu Hill Areas Conservation Authority (H.A.C.A), rep by the Chairman, H.A.C.A., O/o The Housing and Urban Development Department, Secretariat, St. George Fort, Chennai-600 009.

¶10

4.T.N. State Department of Environment, rep. by the Member Secretary – SEIAA, Office of the Director, Panagla Building – Ground Floor, No.1, Jeenis Road, Saidapet, Chennai-600 015. 5.Tamilnadu Forest Department (Head Office), rep. by the Principal Chief Conservator of Forests, (Head of Forest Force), Panagal Building - 8^th Floor, No.1, Jeenis Road, Saidapet, Chennai-600 015.

¶11

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶12

6.Tamilnadu State Pollution Control Board, rep. by the Chairman, No.76, Mount Salai, Guindy, Chennai-600 032. 7.The State of Tamilnadu, rep. by the Chief Secretary to the Government, Secretariat, St. George Fort, Chennai-600 009. 8.The District Collector, rep. by the Collector, as Chairperson of Local Planning Authority, O/o the District Collector, Coimbatore – 641 001. 9.Madukkarai Town Panchayat, rep. by the Executive Officer, Madukkarai, Coimbatore-641 005. 10.District Forest Officer, Coimbatore Division, Mettupalayam Road, Coimbatore-641 043.

¶13

11.Ministry of Housing & Urban Development (Provery Alleviation), rep. by the Secretary (Jn NURM), Government of India, Room No.125, C-Wing, Nirman Bhavan, Maulana Azad Road, New Delhi-110 011. 12.Ministry of Environment and Forests, Government of India, Paryavam Bhavan, Room No.548, C.G.O. Complex, Lodhi Road, (Near Nehru Stadium), New Delhi-110 003. 13.National Board for Wild Life, rep. by Wildlife Warden, Ministry of Environment and Forests, Government of India, Paryavam Bhavan, Room No.548, C.G.O. Complex, Lodhi Road, (Near Nehru Stadium), New Delhi-110 003. ... Respondents

¶14

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶15

Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issue of Writ of Mandamus directing respondent No.8 – the District Collector of Coimbatore to demolish the un-authorised structures put up in S.F.No.950/3 of Maudkkarai village in Coimbatore South District and in S.F.No.226/3 of Sundakkamuthur village in Coimbatore South District and to restore the area to status quo ante immediately.

¶16

For Petitioner : Mr.Vishwanath Swami (Party in – person)

¶17

For Respondents : Mr.P.H.Arvind Pandian Addl. Advocate General assisted by Mr.B.Kesavan for R1 Mr.S.T.S.Moorthy Government Pleader for R2 to R4 and R7 to R9 Mr.M.K.Subramanian Spl. G.P. (Forest) for R5 and R10 Mrs.Rita Chandrasekaran for R6 Mr.Su.Srinivasan Asst. Solicitor General for R11 to R13 O R D E R

¶18

(Order of the Court was made by The Hon'ble Chief Justice)

¶19

The petitioner, an environment activist, seeks to raise an issue through this Public Interest Litigation that the Government authorities themselves are violating the norms in constructing the tenements for rehabilitating displaced slum dwellers. It is the case of the petitioner that the place where these constructions have been made forms part of the Western Ghats, affecting the balance of the environment.

¶20

The counter-affidavit filed by respondent No.1/Tamil Nadu Slum Clearance Board seeks to place on record the factual situation, which does give credence to the allegations of the petitioner that the constructions were made without requisite prior sanctions. However, the authorities having woken up to the matter after the writ petition was filed, seek to cure the defects by obtaining requisite permissions.

¶21

The construction made by respondent No.1 is of 960 tenements at Anna Nagar of Madukkarai village and 224 tenements at Malai Nagar of Sundakkamuthur village in Coimbatore Corporation. The latter is stated to be within the Coimbatore Corporation limits, while Anna Nagar in Madukkarai village is abutting the Corporation boundary.

¶22

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶23

In so far as 960 tenements of Madukkarai village are concerned, it has been categorically averred that the village is not in the list of villages notified as Hill areas as per G.O.No.49, Housing and Urban Development (UD2-2) Department, dated 24.03.2003 and thus, No Objection Certificates from the Forest Department and Hill Area Conservation Authority (HACA) are not required. The land is stated to be classified as “Assessed Waste”. The various permissions obtained have been set out and qua the environmental clearance authority, application along with the fee has been filed with the State Level Environmental Impact Assessment Authority. However, it is obvious that the construction was started without first obtaining the requisite permission, as the development charges itself have been paid only on 14.03.2015, while publication for change of land use has taken place on 29.04.2015.

¶24

However, as far as Malai Nagar of Sundakkamuthu village is concerned, the site is 250 meter away from the boundary of Boluvampatti Reserve Forest boundary. The change of land use from the agricultural zone to mixed residential zone is stated to have been obtained on 28.5.2014, whereafter, publication was made. The Conservator of Forests is stated to have recommended to the Chief Conservator of Forests, Chennai for issue of No Objection Certificate, which was only on 30.04.2015. The reclassification of land has been approved by the Coimbatore Local Planning Authority, vide its resolution No.47, dated 06.05.2015 and HACA has recommended to approve this proposal for conversion of the land use on 07.05.2015.

¶25

The aforesaid facts, thus, once again show that without prior permission, construction was undertaken though subsequently sanctions have been obtained. The learned Additional Advocate General, in fact, states that the only thing which needs to be done is issuance of Government Order detailing out the permissions and sanctions already obtained.

¶26

We must express displeasure at the manner in which the project had been undertaken - putting the cart before the horse. The Government cannot be the violator - various competent authorities have undertaken the project without first obtaining the requisite permissions, as would be expected of any other private citizen. This is actually what the State Government has done, though subsequently requisite permissions are stated to have been obtained. We, thus, call upon the authorities to ensure that it is not done in future.

¶27

We also make it clear that these tenements will not be permitted to be occupied until and unless all requisite formalities are complete and any sanction which remains to be obtained, must also be obtained.

¶28

The sanctions and permissions granted are not in question before us in this writ petition. Thus, we cannot find fault with the same, but suffice to say that the inadequacies have come to light

¶29

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶30

only because the Public Interest Litigation was filed, whereafter, the State Government appears to have woken up to the inadequacies and obtained requisite permissions. Thus, at least at the stage when the petitioner approached this Court and sought to raise an important public issue, the infirmities existed, though subsequently they have been rectified - the legality of those are not in question before us.

¶31

We do believe that the petitioner should be compensated for the costs incurred in approaching this Court for remedying the inadequacies, which we quantify at Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) to be paid to the petitioner by the State.

¶32

The writ petition is closed in aforesaid terms.
Consequently, M.P.No.1 of 2015 is also closed.
Sd/-
Assistant Registrar
//True Copy//
Sub Assistant Registrar
bbr
To

¶33

1.The Executive Engineer, Tamil Nadu Slum Clearance Board (TNSCB), Coimbatore Division, No.13-A, Arokiasamy Road – West,

¶34

R.S.Puram, Coimbatore-641 002.

¶35

2.The Director, Directorate of Town and Country Planning (D.T.C.P), No.807, Anna Salai, Chennai-600 002. 3.The Chairman, Tamilnadu Hill Areas Conservation Authority (H.A.C.A), O/o The Housing and Urban Development Department, Secretariat, St. George Fort, Chennai-600 009. 4.The Member Secretary, T.N. State Department of Environment, Office of the Director, Panagla Building – Ground Floor, No.1, Jeenis Road, Saidapet, Chennai-600 015.

¶36

5.The Principal Chief Conservator of Forests, (Head of Forest Force), Tamilnadu Forest Department (Head Office), Panagal Building - 8^th Floor, No.1, Jeenis Road, Saidapet, Chennai-600 015.

¶37

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶38

6.The Chairman, Tamilnadu State Pollution Control Board, No.76, Mount Salai, Guindy, Chennai-600 032. 7.The Chief Secretary to the Government, State of Tamilnadu, Secretariat, St. George Fort, Chennai-600 009. 8.The District Collector, rep. by the Collector, as Chairperson of Local Planning Authority, O/o the District Collector, Coimbatore – 641 001. 9.The Executive Officer, Madukkarai Town Panchayat, Madukkarai, Coimbatore-641 005. 10.TheDistrict Forest Officer, Coimbatore Division, Mettupalayam Road, Coimbatore-641 043. 11.The Secretary (Jn NURM), Ministry of Housing & Urban Development (Provery Alleviation), Government of India, Room No.125, C-Wing, Nirman Bhavan, Maulana Azad Road, New Delhi-110 011. 12.Ministry of Environment and Forests, Government of India, Paryavam Bhavan, Room No.548, C.G.O. Complex, Lodhi Road, (Near Nehru Stadium), New Delhi-110 003. 13.The Wildlife Warden, National Board for Wild Life, Ministry of Environment and Forests, Government of India, Paryavam Bhavan, Room No.548, C.G.O. Complex, Lodhi Road, (Near Nehru Stadium), New Delhi-110 003.

¶39

4 cc to Mr.Vishwanath Swami, Advocate Sr.No.27348

¶40

1 cc to Mr.B.Kesavan, Advocate Sr.No.27367

¶41

1 cc to Mrs.Rita Chandrasekar, Advocate Sr.No.27308

¶42

1 cc to Mr.Government Pleader Advocate Sr.No.27372

¶43

W.P.No.10876 of 2015

¶44

lrs(co) pmk.10.6.2015

¶45

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

Vishwanath Swami, v. Tamil Nadu Slum Clearance

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vishwanath Swami, v. Tamil Nadu Slum Clearance

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

V.Murugan, Vs The Executive Engineer

S.Srikumar Vs Joint Commissioner/Executive

L.Sengottuvelappan Vs The Assistant Engineer

I.Mohamed Ibrahim, Vs The CEO (Chief Executive

Dr. K. Kathirvel Vs M/S. Phoenix Arc Pvt. Ltd.

Subhiksha Trading Services Vs Kotak Mahindra Bank Ltd.