Dismissed

K.Ramachandran v. Asst. Executive Engineer U-20

Madras HC7 Apr 2022WP/5845/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court held that a writ petition challenging a lock, seal and demolition notice issued under the Town and Country Planning Act is not maintainable as the petitioner has not exhausted the statutory appellate remedy provided under Section 80-A of the Tamil Nadu Town and Country Planning Act.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner directed to file appeal before the Secretary to Government within two weeks; Writ Petition dismissed.

K.Ramachandran Vs Asst. Executive Engineer U-20 — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Madras HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED : 07.04.2022

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.RAJA and THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.SOUNTHAR

¶5

W.P.No.5845 of 2022 and WMP.No.5939 of 2022

¶6

K.Ramachandran ... Petitioner

¶7

-vs-

¶8

The Assistant Executive Engineer U-20 GCC., Ambattur Zone-7, Ward 90, 536, CTH Road, Ambattur, Chennai-600 053.

¶9

The Executive Engineer, Greater Chennai Corporation, Zone-7, 536, Chennai Thiruvallur Highway Road, Ambattur, Chennai-600 053.

¶10

The Commissioner, GCC, Ambattur Zone-7, Ward 90, 536, CTH Road, Ambattur, Chennai-600 053.

¶11

The Commissioner, Greater Chennai Corporation, Ripon Building, Periamet, Chennai-600 003.

¶12

The Member-Secretary CMDA, Egmore, Chennai-600 008.

¶13

The Secretary to Government of Tamil Nadu, Department of Housing and Urban Development, Secretariat, Chennai-600 009. ... Respondents

¶14

Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking for issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the entire records of the respondents to quash the 2^nd respondent's notice No.ZONE-VII/TPENF/Dn-90/229/2022 dated 25.01.2022 for lock, seal and demolish the petitioner's residential house building with ground floor, 2^nd floor and 3^rd

¶15

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

¶16

floor totally to an extent of 2193 sq.ft. which was built up in the allotted base land to an extent of 731 sq.ft. owned by the petitioner as per the Government (respondents) allotment No.ASPL/569/82 dated 17.08.1983 and further direction to the 2^nd respondent to consider the petitioner's representation dated 05.02.2022 for regularization of the petitioner's residential building's disputed floors in accordance with law to secure the ends of justice.

¶17

For Petitioner : *Ms.S.Lakshmipriya

¶18

for Mr.T.Vijay Shankar

¶19

For Respondents : Mr.K.Raja Shrinivas, 2 to 4 Standing Counsel

¶20

Standing Counsel

¶21

For 5^th respondent : Mrs.C.Sumathi

¶22

For 6^th respondent : Mr.K.Surender, Addl. Govt. Pleader

¶23

ORDER

¶24

(Order of the Court was made by T.RAJA, J.)

¶25

This Writ Petition has been filed by the Writ Petitioner challenging the impugned proceedings dated 25.01.2022 issued by the 2^nd respondent, namely, The Executive Engineer, Greater Chennai Corporation, Zone-7, 536, Chennai Thiruvallur Highway Road, Ambattur, Chennai-600 053 for locking, sealing and demolishing the petitioner's residential house with ground floor, 2^nd floor and 3^rd floor totally to an extent of 2193 sq.ft. which was built up in the allotted base land to an extent of 731 sq.ft. owned by the petitioner as per the Government (respondents) allotment No.ASPL/569/82 dated 17.08.1983 with a consequential direction, directing the 2^nd respondent to consider the petitioner's representation dated 05.02.2022 for regularization of the petitioner's residential building's disputed floors in accordance with law.

¶26

The gist of this case is that since the petitioner has put up unauthorized construction of 202.77 metres, an action was taken by the CMDA earlier vide order dated 25.01.2000 in Lr.No.REG/B8/19839/99, calling upon him to pay the regularization fee after deduction of the amount of Rs.1750/deposited already, namely, Rs.2,51,750/- along with development charges for building Rs.2,100/- and for scrutiny fee shortfall for payment made earlier Rs.520/-. Since the petitioner has not come forward to pay the said amount, the impugned lock and seal and demolition notice in No.ZONE-VII/TPENF/Dn-90/229/2022 dated 25.01.2022 was issued by the 2^nd respondent after twenty years.

¶27

When the matter was taken up today, learned Counsel appearing for the 6^th respondent informed us that the lock and seal and demolition notice shows that against the said notice,

¶28

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

¶29

there is an appeal provision available for the petitioner under Section 80-A of the Tamil Nadu Town and Country Planning Act. Therefore, without approaching the statutory appellate authority, the petitioner has approached this Court by filing the present Writ Petition, which is not at all maintainable.

¶30

Learned Counsel for the 6^th respondent would also submit that the petitioner has not even shown any seriousness to make the payment of Rs.2,51,000/- as directed by the CMDA by issuing a notice dated 25.01.2000.

¶31

Considering the facts and circumstances of the matter, we do not wish to dwell into the claim and counter claim as there is an appeal provision under Section 80-A of the Tamil Nadu Town and Country Planning Act, we hereby direct the petitioner to file an appeal before the 6^th respondent, namely, The Secretary to the Government of Tamil Nadu, Department of Housing and Urban Development, Secretariat, Chennai-600 009, within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this Order against the notice dated 25.01.2022 issued by the 2^nd respondent and if any such appeal is filed within such time, the 6^th respondent shall consider and dispose of the same on merits by giving requisite notice to the aggrieved persons, within a period of two weeks thereafter.

¶32

With the above observation and direction, the Writ Petition is dismissed. No costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.

¶33

Sd/-

¶34

Assistant Registrar(CS IV)

¶35

//True Copy//

¶36

*correction carried out as per Petitioner's Counsel Letter dated 13.05.2022

¶37

-s/d-

¶38

Sub Assistant Registrar(CSII) dt:20.05.2022

¶39

//True Copy//

¶40

Sub Assistant Registrar

¶41

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

¶42

tsi To

¶43

The Assistant Executive Engineer U-20 GCC., Ambattur Zone-7, Ward 90, 536, CTH Road, Ambattur, Chennai-600 053.

¶44

The Executive Engineer, Greater Chennai Corporation, Zone-7, 536, Chennai Thiruvallur Highway Road, Ambattur, Chennai-600 053.

¶45

The Commissioner, GCC, Ambattur Zone-7, Ward 90, 536, CTH Road, Ambattur, Chennai-600 053.

¶46

to be substituted the order already despatched on 06.05.2022

¶47

The Commissioner, Greater Chennai Corporation, Ripon Building, Periamet, Chennai-600 003.

¶48

The Member-Secretary CMDA, Egmore, Chennai-600 008.

¶49

The Secretary to Government of Tamil Nadu, Department of Housing and Urban Development, Secretariat, Chennai-600 009.

¶50

+1 cc to Mr.T.Vijayashankaran ., Advocate Sr.NO. 24606 +1 cc to Mr.K.Raja Shrinivasan, Advocate Sr.NO. 24649 +1 cc to Government Pleader Sr.NO. 24316

¶51

W.P.No.5845 of 2022

¶52

RSV(CO) A.SK(22/04/2022) A.SK(23/05/2022)

¶53

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

K.Ramachandran v. Asst. Executive Engineer U-20

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

K.Ramachandran v. Asst. Executive Engineer U-20

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

Ramamoorthy Vs The District Collector

S.Varalakshmi @ Shobana, Vs The District Collector

Aathi Karuppusamy Vs Government of Tamil Nadu

Ambathur Estate Salaiyora Sirukadai Vs The Zonal Executive Engineer/

Maheswari Vs The District Collector

P.Duraisamy Vs State of Tamil Nadu