Dismissed

Meenakokila v. the commissioner

Madras HC16 Nov 2022WP/5838/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This order dismissed a writ petition challenging a Lock & Seal notice issued by the Chennai Corporation for alleged unauthorized construction. The High Court held there was no ground to entertain the petition as a statutory appeal under Section 80(A) of the Town and Country Planning Act was available.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition dismissed with liberty to approach the Government under Section 80(A); no order as to costs.

Meenakokila Vs the commissioner — Property and Title | Madras HC (2022)

¶1

W.P.No.5838 of 2022

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED: 16.11.2022

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE R.SUBRAMANIAN AND THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE K.KUMARESH BABU

¶6

W.P.No.5838 of 2022 and W.M.P.No.5931 of 2022

Meenakokila

...Petitioner

Vs.

1.The Commissioner, Greater Chennai Corporation, Rippon Building, Chennai – 600 003.

¶11

2.The Zonal Officer Zone-04, Greater Chennai Corporation, No.266, Tondiayarpet High Road,

¶12

3.The Executive Engineer, Div-44 Zone-4 Greater Chennai, Corporation No.266 Tondiayarpet High Road, Old Washermanpet, Chennai – 600 021.

¶13

4.The Assistant Executive Engineer, Div-44 Zone-4 Greater Chennai Corporation Nattal Garden 2nd Street, Perambur, Chennai – 600 011.

¶14

5.The Assistant Engineer, Div-44 Zone-4 Greater Chennai, Corporation Nattal Garden 2nd Street, Perambur, Chennai – 600 011.

¶15

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶16

1/6

¶17

W.P.No.5838 of 2022

¶18

6.The Chairman/Managing Director, Tamil Nadu Slum Clearance Board, Chennai – 600 005.

¶19

(R6 suo motu impleaded vide order dt. 11.04.2022 made in W.P.No.5838/2022) Respondents

¶20

Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, for the

¶21

issuance of a Writ of Certiorari, calling for the records of the respondent relating

¶22

to the impugned notice issued lock and seal notice dated 28.12.2021 signed on

¶23

12.01.2022 and which was received on 24.01.2022 and quash the same as

¶24

illegal.

¶25

For Petitioner : Mr.M.Dharanidharan

¶26

For Respondents : Mr.D.B.R.Prabhu for R1 to R5 Standing Counsel

¶27

Mr.G.Sivakumar for R6

¶28

O R D E R

¶29

(Order of the court was delivered by R.Subramanian, J.)

¶30

Challenge is to the Lock and Seal notice dated 28.12.2021 issued by the

¶31

Chennai Corporation claiming that the petitioner is putting up construction without an approved plan.

¶32

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶33

2/6

¶34

W.P.No.5838 of 2022

¶35

2.Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the construction was put up 40 years back by her father and the area in which the building has been put up is a slum area and therefore, the planning permission is not mandatory.

¶36

3.The Secretary of the Tamil Nadu Urban Habitat Development Board (formerly known as Tamil Nadu Slum Clearance Board) has filed a counter affidavit stating that the portion of the land that is in occupation of the petitioner does not fall with in the approved slum area and neither the petitioner nor her predecessor have been granted an allotment by the Board. Therefore, the claim of the petitioner that it is a slum area and that the land has been allotted to her appears to be incorrect.

¶37

4.The Chennai Corporation has issued Lock & Seal notice and de-

¶38

occupation notice which are appealable under Section 80 (A) of the Tamil Nadu Town and Country Planning Act.

¶39

3/6

¶40

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶41

W.P.No.5838 of 2022

¶42

5.We therefore see no ground to entertain the Writ Petition and the Writ Petition is dismissed with liberty to the petitioner to approach the Government under Section 80 (A). There shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

¶43

(R.S.M., J.) (K.B., J.) 16.11.2022 Index: no Speaking order: Yes pam

¶44

4/6

¶45

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶46

W.P.No.5838 of 2022

¶47

¶48

1.The Commissioner, Greater Chennai Corporation, Rippon Building, Chennai – 600 003.

¶49

2.The Zonal Officer Zone-04, Greater Chennai Corporation, No.266, Tondiayarpet High Road,

¶50

3.The Executive Engineer, Div-44 Zone-4 Greater Chennai, Corporation No.266 Tondiayarpet High Road, Old Washermanpet, Chennai – 600 021.

¶51

4.The Assistant Executive Engineer, Div-44 Zone-4 Greater Chennai Corporation Nattal Garden 2nd Street, Perambur, Chennai – 600 011.

¶52

5.The Assistant Engineer, Div-44 Zone-4 Greater Chennai, Corporation Nattal Garden 2nd Street, Perambur, Chennai – 600 011.

¶53

6.The Chairman/Managing Director, Tamil Nadu Slum Clearance Board, Chennai – 600 005.

¶54

5/6

¶55

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶56

W.P.No.5838 of 2022

¶57

R.SUBRAMANIAN, J. and K. KUMARESH BABU, J.

¶58

pam

¶59

W.P.No.5838 of 2022

¶60

16.11.2022

¶61

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶62

6/6

Meenakokila v. the commissioner

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Meenakokila v. the commissioner

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

Tamil Nadu Airport Workers Union Vs E.Deivasagayam

Church Of South India Trust Association Vs The District Revenue Officer

The Tamilnadu Housing Board Vs R.Rajaram

M.Karthikeyan Vs The State of Tamil Nadu

N.Anand Pai Vs The State of Tamil Nadu

Seetharaman Vs The State Human Rights