Disposed

P.Anand v. The Director of Municipal

Madras HC13 Jan 2015WP/420/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner sought direction to municipal authorities to stop illegal construction by third respondent. Court observed that with stop work notice issued, no further order needed, directing authorities to ensure compliance and take consequential action.

What did the court decide?

No order necessary as stop work notice issued; directed authorities to ensure compliance and take consequential action.

P.Anand Vs The Director of Municipal — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Madras HC (2015)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED : 13.01.2015

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SATISH K. AGNIHOTRI AND

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M. VENUGOPAL W.P. No.420 of 2015 and M.P. No.1 of 2015

¶6

P. Anand Petitioner

¶7

vs.
1 The Director of Municipal Administration
Commissionerate of Municipal Administration
Chepauk
Chennai
2 The Commissioner
Pallavaram Municipality
Pallavaram
Chennai
3 B. Shanmugasundaram Respondents

¶8

Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking a writ of mandamus directing the respondents 1 and 2 to take appropriate action to prevent the third respondent from putting up any illegal and unauthorised building construction in land comprised in Plot No.61 situated in Survey No.40/7 and 40/11, Bajanai Koil Street, Hastinapuram Village, Chromepet, Chennai, by considering the petitioner's representations dated 15.12.2014 and 29.12.2014 and remove the construction that has been put up by him in the said property.

¶9

For petitioner Mr. AR.L. Sundaresan, Sr. Counsel for M/s. AL. Gandhimathi For R1 Mr. N. Sakthivel Government Advocate For R2 Mr. P. Srinivas

¶10

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

¶11

ORDER

¶12

The petitioner seeks a direction to the respondents 1 and 2 to take appropriate action against the third respondent from putting up any illegal and unauthorised building construction in the land comprised in Plot No.61, situated in Survey No.40/7 and 40/11, Bajanai Koil Street, Hastinapuram Village, Chromepet, Chennai, by considering his representations dated 15.12.2014 and 29.12.2014 and to remove the construction that has been put up by the third respondent in the said property.

¶13

2 During the course of arguments, the learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner brought to our notice, the stop work notice dated 06.01.2015 issued against the third respondent. It is submitted that despite the said stop work notice, the third respondent is still continuing with the construction.

¶14

3 Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, we observe that if stop work notice has been issued, the authorities are under an obligation to ensure that the notice is complied with fully in its letter and spirit. Accordingly, no order is necessary, at this stage. However, the authorities are directed to ensure that the provisions of law are properly followed and consequential action will have to be taken at the earliest.

¶15

4 The writ petition stands disposed of accordingly. Costs made easy. Connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.

¶16

Sd/-

¶17

Asst.Registrar (CS IV )

/true copy/

Sub Asst. Registrar

cad

1 The Director of Municipal Administration Commissionerate of Municipal Administration Chepauk Chennai

¶23

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

¶24

2 The Commissioner Pallavaram Municipality Pallavaram Chennai

¶25

1 cc to Mr.P. Srinivas, Advocate, Sr. 2009 2 ccs to Mr.P. Gopiraja, Advocate, SR. 1953

¶26

W.P. No.420 of 2015

¶27

SSI (CO)
kk 20/1

¶28

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

P.Anand v. The Director of Municipal

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

P.Anand v. The Director of Municipal

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

The Registar Vs Annavajjala Aghamarsh

The Management of Vs the Presiding Officer

S.Muniappan, Vs Group Commandant

V.Thangaraj Vs The District Collector

Mr.v.Ranganathan Vs The District Collector

State Bank of Travancore Vs District Collector