Disposed¶37

T.G.Ramesh Babu v. the Chennai Metropolitan Development Authority

Madras HC7 Feb 2025WP/36530/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

W.P.No.36530 of 2024 (Madras HC, 07.02.2025): mandamus to consider representation dated 20.05.2024 on unauthorised construction by T.G.Suresh Babu; CMDA, Greater Chennai Corporation (Commissioner; Executive Engineer Ward No.117); deviation from approved plan (setbacks; unauthorised 2nd floor RCC/sheet roofs; Residential-to-Commercial change); demolition directed within twelve weeks under Tamil Nadu Town and Country Planning Act; Article 226; disposed, no costs.

What did the court decide?

Respondents 2 and 3 directed to institute all further proceedings following due process and demolish the unauthorised portion of the building, not later than twelve weeks from receipt of a copy of the order; no costs. ¶37

T.G.Ramesh Babu Vs the Chennai Metropolitan… — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶37

Issue for consideration

Whether respondents 1 to 3 should be directed to consider and dispose of the petitioner's representation dated 20.05.2024 alleging unauthorised construction by the fourth respondent.

¶24

Court's answer

On inspection (pursuant to the interim order) and reinspection, the authorities found that the fourth respondent had constructed the building in deviation of the approved plan, including reduced setbacks, unauthorised second-floor structures (62.78 sq.m RCC roof and 259.8 sq.m sheet roof) and change of first-floor usage from Residential to Commercial.

¶26

Ratio / Principle

In view of the status report filed by the third respondent, respondents 2 and 3 are directed to institute all further proceedings by following due process and demolish the unauthorised portion of the building, as expeditiously as possible, but not later than twelve weeks from receipt of a copy of the order; the writ petition stands disposed of with no costs.

¶37

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Writ of mandamus disposed of by the Madras High Court (Division Bench; order by S.M.Subramaniam,J.). Pursuant to an interim order, Greater Chennai Corporation inspections revealed that the fourth respondent (T.G.Suresh Babu) had constructed the building in deviation of the approved plan — reduced front/side setbacks on ground and first floors, an unauthorised second floor (RCC roof 62.78 sq.m; sheet roof 259.8 sq.m) and change of first-floor usage from Residential to Commercial. On the status report of the third respondent, respondents 2 and 3 (Commissioner and Executive Engineer, Greater Chennai Corporation) were directed to institute all further proceedings by following due process — actions indicated under the Tamil Nadu Town and Country Planning Act — and demolish the unauthorised portion of the building, as expeditiously as possible, but not later than twelve weeks from receipt of a copy of the order. No costs.

¶1

W.P.No.36530 of 2024

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED: 07.02.2025

¶4

CORAM :

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM AND

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE K.RAJASEKAR

¶7

W.P.No.36530 of 2024

¶8

T.G.Ramesh Babu .. Petitioner

¶9

¶10

The Chennai Metropolitan Development Authority Thalamuthu Natarajan Building No.1, Gandhi Irwin Road

¶11

Chennai 600 008

¶12

The Commissioner Greater Chennai Corporation Ripon Building, E.V.R.Road Park Town, Chennai

¶13

The Executive Engineer Ward No.117, Corporation of Chennai No.45, South Boag Road T.Nagar, Chennai 600 017

¶14

T.G.Suresh Babu

¶15

.. Respondents

¶16

Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents 1 to 3 to

¶17

Page 1 of 6

¶18

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

¶19

W.P.No.36530 of 2024

¶20

consider petitioner's representation and dispose of the petitioner's representation dated 20.05.2024.

¶21

For Petitioner :: Mr.R.Lawrence Jeevakumar for Mr.P.Jayachandran For Respondents :: Mr.Y.Bhuvaneshkumar Standing Counsel for R1 Mr.D.B.R.Prabhu Standing Counsel for R2 & R3 Mr.K.Bommuraj for R4

¶22

ORDER

¶23

(Order of the Court was made by S.M.SUBRAMANIAM,J.)

¶24

The writ of mandamus has been instituted to direct the respondents 1

¶25

to 3 to consider the representation submitted by the petitioner.

¶26

2. Pursuant to the interim order passed by this Court, the Greater Chennai Corporation conducted an inspection in the subject property. Reinspection was also conducted by the Executive Engineer along with the Assistant Executive Engineer and Assistant Engineer of Greater Chennai Corporation. The authorities found that the fourth respondent had constructed the building in deviation of the approved plan, as follows:-

¶27

Page 2 of 6

¶28

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

¶29

W.P.No.36530 of 2024

¶30

*Sl.No.*	*Setback*	*As per* *plan (In* *Metre)*	*As per site* *condition (In* *Metre)*	*Deviation (In* *Metre)*
Ground	Floor
1	Front set back	4.57	2.3	2.27
2	Side set back (Left)	3.50	3.35	0.15
3	Side set back (Right)	1.5	1.4	0.1
4	Rear set back	-	-	-
First Flo	or
1	Front set back	4.57	2.3	2.27
2	Side set back (Left)	3.50	3.35	0.15
3	Side set back (Right)	1.5	1.4	0.1
4	Rear set back	-	-	-
Moreov follows:	er, the 4^threspondent has c	onstructed	in the 2^ndfloor u	nauthorisedly as
1	Permanent structure RCC r	oof	(4.65x13.50) = 62.78 sq.m	(4.65x13.50) = 62.78 sq.m
	Temporary structure sheet	roof only	(19.25x13.50) = 259.8 sq.m	(19.25x13.50) = 259.8 sq.m
USAGE	OF BUILDING
	Floor	As	per plan	As per site
Ground	Floor	Co	mmercial	Commercial
First Flo	or	Re	sidential	Commercial

¶31

3. With reference to the unauthorised constructions, the learned

¶32

standing counsel for the respondents 2 & 3 would submit that further actions will be initiated under the provisions of the Tamil Nadu Town and

¶33

Page 3 of 6

¶34

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

¶35

W.P.No.36530 of 2024

¶36

Country Planning Act.

¶37

4. In view of the status report filed by the third respondent, the respondents 2 & 3 are directed to institute all further proceedings by following due process and demolish the unauthorised portion of the building, as expeditiously as possible, but not later than twelve weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The writ petition stands disposed

¶38

of. No costs.

¶39

Index : yes/no (S.M.S.,J.) (K.R.S.,J.) Neutral citation : yes/no 07.02.2025

¶40

¶41

¶42