Allowed

Muthukrishnan P.S. v. the Director of Town and Country Planning

Madras HC8 Jul 2022WP(MD)/193/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petition filed seeking declaration that reservation of land as a scheme road in the Mathichiyam Detailed Development Plan lapsed under Section 38 of TN Town and Country Planning Act due to failure to effect acquisition within three years. Court granted declaration and directed authorities to update records.

What did the court decide?

Declaration that reservation of land has lapsed; direction to authorities to make necessary changes in records; direction to third respondent to accord police protection.

Muthukrishnan P.S. Vs the Director of Town and… — Municipal and Town Planning | Madras HC (2022)

¶1

W.P.(MD).No.193 of 2022

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED : 08.07.2022

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE G.R.SWAMINATHAN

¶6

W.P.(MD).No.193 of 2022

P.S.Muthukrishnan

... Petitioner

Vs.

1.The Director of Town and Country Planning,

¶11

807, Anna Salai, Chennai.

¶12

2.The Member Secretary, Madurai Local Planning Authority, Madurai.

¶13

3.The Commissioner of Police, Madurai Police Commissionerate, Madurai. ...Respondents

¶14

Prayer : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Declaration, to declare the reservation made in respect of the petitioner's land in Old Survey No.4/3C1, Managiri Village, Madurai forming part of the Mathichiyam Detailed Development Plan Part III A to have lapsed in light of Section 38 of the Tamil Nadu Town and Country Planning Act, 1971, (TN ACT 35 of 1974) and the order made by this Court in W.P.(MD).No.398 of 2021 dated 29.01.2021 and consequently direct the third respondent to accord police protection for effecting development / construction in the said land.

¶15

1/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶16

W.P.(MD).No.193 of 2022

¶17

For Petitioner : Mr.M.Mahaboob Athiff For Respondents : Mr.M.Sarangan, Additional Government Pleader.

¶18

ORDER

¶19

Heard the learned counsel on either side.

¶20

The petition mentioned land was included in the Mathichiyam Detailed

¶21

Development Plan Part III-A, which was published in the year 1999, as a scheme road. Since the consequential acquisition steps have not been taken within the next three years, in view of the statutory mandate contained under

¶22

Section 38 of the Tamil Nadu Town and Country Planning Act, 1971, the said reservation is deemed to have lapsed. Declaration is accordingly granted. The authorities concerned are directed to make necessary changes in the relevant records.

¶23

This Writ Petition is allowed accordingly. There shall be no order as to

¶24

costs.

¶25

08.07.2022 Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes/ No Lm

¶26

2/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶27

W.P.(MD).No.193 of 2022

¶28

¶29

1.The Director of Town and Country Planning, 807, Anna Salai, Chennai.

¶30

2.The Member Secretary, Madurai Local Planning Authority, Madurai.

¶31

3.The Commissioner of Police, Madurai Police Commissionerate, Madurai.

¶32

3/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶33

W.P.(MD).No.193 of 2022

¶34

G.R.SWAMINATHAN, J.

¶35

¶36

W.P.(MD).No.193 of 2022

¶37

08.07.2022

¶38

4/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Muthukrishnan P.S. v. the Director of Town and Country Planning

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Muthukrishnan P.S. v. the Director of Town and Country Planning

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

Syed Hakkim Vs the Government of India

[email protected] Vs the Tahsildar

Suresh Vs the District Collector

M.Arockiyadoss Vs M.Gnanamirtham

Indra Ganesan College of Education Vs Tamil Nadu Teacher Education University

Idhayam College of Education Vs Tamil Nadu Teacher Education University