Allowed

Star Model Matriculation v. the Commissioner of Town and

Madras HC8 Mar 2017WP(MD)/22483/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This single judge bench allowed a writ petition under Article 226 seeking to quash an administrative order dated 16.11.2016. The petitioner contended the order was incompetent as the planning act applied later than the construction date and section of law was wrongly quoted. The respondent undertook to withdraw the error, leading the court to quash the impugned order.

What did the court decide?

The order dated 16.11.2016 passed by the second respondent is quashed by a Writ of Certiorari. The writ petition is allowed without costs.

Star Model Matriculation Vs the Commissioner of Town… — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2017)

¶1

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 08.03.2017

¶3

CORAM:

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.SELVAM and

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.AUTHINATHAN

¶6

W.P(MD)No.22483 of 2016 and W.M.P(MD)No.16116 of 2016

¶7

Star Model Matriculation School, represented by its Correspondent, M.Jeyadoss, S/o Marcion, Tiruchendur, Thoothukudi District.

¶8

.. Petitioner

¶9

Vs.

¶10

1.The Commissioner of Town and Country Planning, Town and Country Planning Department,

¶11

No.807, Anna Salai, Chennai-600 002.

¶12

2.The Deputy Director of Town and Country Planning, Tirunelveli Region, Tirunelveli – 625 002.

¶13

3.The Executive Officer, Tiruchendur Town Panchayat, Thoothukudi District.

¶14

.. Respondents

¶15

PRAYER: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a Writ of Certiorari calling for the records relating to the proceedings of the Impugned Order in Na.Ka.No.232/2015 jpypk3(9) dated 16.11.2016 on the file of the second Respondent and quash the same.

¶16

For Petitioner : Mr.G.Prabhu Rajadurai For Respondents : Mr.M.Govindan, Special Government Pleader.

¶17

ORDER

¶18

[Order of the Court was made by A.SELVAM, J. ]

¶19

This writ petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to call for records relating to the order dated 16.11.2016 passed in Na.Ka.No.232/2015 jpypk3(9) by the second respondent and quash the same, by way of issuing a writ of certiorari.

¶20

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has contended to the effect that the building of the petitioner has

¶21

¶22

been constructed in the year 2008 whereas the Tamil Nadu Town and Country Planning Act, 1971 is applicable to non-planning area only in the year 2010 and under the said circumstances the second respondent is totally incompetent to pass such kind of order and therefore the present writ petition has been filed for getting the relief sought therein.

¶23

3.The learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the respondents has also equally contended that in the impugned order Section of Law has been wrongly quoted and the second respondent is ready to withdraw the same.

¶24

4.Considering the divergent contentions putforth on either side and also considering the undertaking given on the side of the second respondent, this Court is inclined to pass the following order.

¶25

5.In fine, this writ petition is allowed without costs and the order dated 16.11.2016 passed in Na.Ka.No.232/2015 jpypk3(9) by the second respondent is quashed. However the respondents are at liberty to take appropriate action against the petitioner under due process of law. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.

¶26

Sd/-

¶27

Assistant Registrar(co)

¶28

/True Copy/

¶29

¶30

1.The Commissioner of Town and Country Planning, Town and Country Planning Department, No.807, Anna Salai, Chennai-600 002.

¶31

2.The Deputy Director of Town and Country Planning, Tirunelveli Region, Tirunelveli – 625 002.

¶32

3.The Executive Officer, Tiruchendur Town Panchayat, Thoothukudi District.

¶33

+1 cc to Mr. G. PRABHU RAJADURAI, ADVOCATE, SR NO.13538

¶34

smn

¶35

MAS/SKN-RSK:13.03.2017:2P-5C ORDER MADE IN W.P(MD)No.22483 of 2016 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ and W.M.P(MD)No.16116 of 2016 08.03.2017

Star Model Matriculation v. the Commissioner of Town and

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Star Model Matriculation v. the Commissioner of Town and

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Dr. T. Sam Elango Vs the Deputy Superintendent of

K.Princy, Vs the Superintendent of Police

Muthiah, Vs Tahsildar

Balagurusamy Vs the District Collector

Susila, Vs the District Collector

Subramanian Vs the District Collector