Disposed

S.Ashok Kumar v. the Commissioner

Madras HC18 Dec 2024WP/34974/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner alleged a builder converted car parking into a shop with plan deviations. The Corporation admitted the violations and had issued a de-occupation notice. The court disposed of the petition directing the Corporation to proceed in accordance with law to remove unauthorised construction.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the Corporation to proceed in accordance with law to remove unauthorised construction and bring building in conformity with sanctioned plan

S.Ashok Kumar Vs the Commissioner — Municipal and Town Planning | Madras HC (2024)

¶1

W.P.No.34974 of 2024

¶2

THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED: 18.12.2024

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.SUBRAMANIAN AND

¶6

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN

¶7

W.P.No.34974 of 2024

S.Ashok Kumar

...Petitioner

Vs.

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

¶12

2.The Executive Engineer, Zone – 10, Greater Chennai Corporation, No.64, Arcot Road, Kodambakkam, Chennai – 600 024.

¶13

3.The Assistant Engineer, Zone – 10, Division – 134, Greater Chennai Corporation, No.58, Thambiah Road, West Mambalam, Chennai – 600 033.

¶14

¶15

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

¶16

W.P.No.34974 of 2024

¶17

4.M/s.Sambhoo Projects Limited, Represented by its Director Mr.G.Mohan Ranga Having Office at Hema's at Tashavan I-12, Anna Nagar, Chennai – 600 102. ...Respondents

¶18

Prayer : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the 2^nd and 3^rd respondents to demolish the unauthorised shop, measuring 275 sq.ft. (Approx.) constructed in the front portion of the Apartment namely Sri Mahalakshmi Apartment, situated in New Door No.51, Old No.21, Thambiah Road, West Mambalam, Chennai – 600 033.

¶19

For Petitioner : Mr.V.V.Sathya For Respondents 1 & 2 : Mr.Arunbabu, Standing Counsel

¶20

¶21

J U D G M E N T

¶22

(Judgment of the Court was delivered by R.SUBRAMANIAN, J. )

¶23

The complaint of the petitioner is that the 4^th respondent has converted a portion of the car parking into a shop and also made certain other deviations in the construction of the building at Old Door No.21, New Door No.51, Thambiah Road, West Mambalam, Chennai – 600 033.

¶24

¶25

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

¶26

W.P.No.34974 of 2024

¶27

2. The Executive Engineer, Zone X of the Greater Chennai

¶28

Corporation has filed an affidavit stating that the violations claimed by the petitioner are correct. He would also submit that a de-occupation notice has been issued on 26.11.2024. We also find that there is a statement regarding completion of further action as provided under the Tamil Nadu Town and Country Planning Act, 1971.

¶29

3. In view of the same, the Writ Petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondent Corporation to proceed in accordance with law to remove the unauthorized construction put up and bring the building in conformity with the sanctioned plan. No costs.

¶30

(R.S.M., J.) (C.K., J.) 18.12.2024 dsa Index : No Neutral Citation : No Speaking order

¶31

¶32

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

¶33

W.P.No.34974 of 2024

¶34

¶35

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

¶36

2.The Executive Engineer, Zone – 10, Greater Chennai Corporation, No.64, Arcot Road, Kodambakkam, Chennai – 600 024.

¶37

3.The Assistant Engineer, Zone – 10, Division – 134, Greater Chennai Corporation, No.58, Thambiah Road, West Mambalam, Chennai – 600 033.

¶38

¶39

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

¶40

W.P.No.34974 of 2024

¶41

R.SUBRAMANIAN, J. and C.KUMARAPPAN, J.

¶42

dsa

¶43

W.P.No.34974 of 2024

¶44

18.12.2024

¶45

¶46

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

S.Ashok Kumar v. the Commissioner

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

S.Ashok Kumar 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

K.Nagan Vs The Chairman

N.Sundaresan Vs The Tamil Nadu State Level Scrutiny Committee-Ii

Sarasu Vs Mani @ Venkatachalam

K. Sivanandam (Died) Vs Krishnaveni Ammal

P.Nandan Babu Vs Srisakthi Divya

S.Mahalakshmi Vs the Revenue Divisional Officer