Madras High Court
G.Shanmugasundar vs Inspector General Of Registration on 2 March, 2018
Bench: T.S.Sivagnanam, R.Tharani
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 02.03.2018
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE Mr.JUSTICE T.S.SIVAGNANAM
AND
THE HONOURABLE Mrs.JUSTICE R.THARANI
Writ Petition (MD).No.1266 of 2018
and
W.M.P.(MD)Nos.2561 and 2562 of 2018
G.Shanmugasundar ... Petitioner
Vs.
1.Inspector General of Registration,
Registration Department,
Santhome, Chennai.
2.Chennai Metropolitan Development Authority (CMDA),
Thalamuthu Natarasanar Maligai,
Gandhi Irwin Road, Egmore,
Chennai-8.
3.The District Collector,
Tiruchirappalli District, Trichy.
4.The Local Town Planning Authority,
Tiruchirappalli Local Planning Authority,
Trichy, Trichy District.
5.The Commissioner,
Tiruchirappalli Corporation,
Trichy.
6.The Assistant Commissioner,
K.Abishekapuram Zone,
Tiruchirappalli City Corporation,
Tiruchirappalli.
7.The Deputy Director,
Trichy Circle,
Tamil Nadu Fire and Rescue Service Department,
Trichy.
8.The Superintending Engineer,
Trichy Electricity Distribution Circle/Metro,
TANGEDCO,
Mannarpuram, Trichy.
9.M/s. Chendur Homes Private Limited,
Rep. By its Managing Director Mr. T.D.Raja,
4G, Arcot Road, Saligramam,
Chennai-600 093.
10.G.Balasubramaniyan
11.Harishlal ... Respondents
(Respondent No.11 is suo motu impleaded
vide Court order dated 23.01.2018 in W.P.(MD)No.1266 of 2018)
Prayer: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India,
praying for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, directing the fourth and sixth
respondents to take appropriate action against the ninth respondent and
demolish the unauthorizedly constructed building situated at Old Survey
No.151/2 and New Town Survey No.98/1, 2 of Ward No.J, Block No.14 of
Uyyakondan Thirumalai Village, Srirangam Taluk, Tiruchirappalli District in
contravention and conditions imposed in Ka.A.No.537/2013 dated 25.11.2013.
!For Petitioner : Mr.T.Senthil Kumar
^For Respondents 1, 3 and 4 : Mr.V.R.Shanmuganathan
Special Government Pleader
For Respondents 5 and 6 : Mr.N.S.Karthikeyan
Standing Counsel
For Respondent No.8 : Mr.Johny Basha
For Mr.Venkatesh kumar
For Respondent No.9 : Mr.M.Saravanakumar
:ORDER
(Order of the Court was made by T.S.SIVAGNANAM, J) Heard Mr.T.Senthil Kumar, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, Mr.V.R.Shanmuganathan, learned Special Governemnt Pleader appearing for the respondents 1, 3 and 4, Mr.N.S.Karthikeyan, learned standing counsel for the respondents 5 and 6, Mr.Mr.Johny Basha, for Mr.Venkateshkumar, learned counsel for the eighth respondent and Mr.M.Saravanakumar, learned counsel for the ninth respondent.
2.This petition has been filed praying for a direction upon the respondents 4 to 6 to take appropriate action against the ninth respondent and demolish the unauthorised construction portion in the building in question as being in contravention of the condition stipulated in the building permission for construction granted on 25.11.2013. The petitioner and the tenth respondent are brothers and they were joint owners of the property in question. Subsequently, they entered into a deed of partition and then an agreement was entered into between the petitioner and the ninth respondent, to whom the petitioner as well as the tenth respondent, had given power of attorney to dealt with the property for the purpose of development of the property. The petitioner has now come forward with this writ petition stating that the ninth respondent has converted the entire stilt area into shops and in spite of notice being given by the respondent/Corporation, no action had been initiated. Therefore, the writ petition has been filed.
3.The learned counsel for the petitioner reiterated the contention put forth in the affidavit filed in support of this writ petition and submitted that no commercial activity should be permitted in a residential complex and the unauthorized conversion of stilt should be removed and whenever there is a violation of building plan, the same has to be rectified. The learned counsel for the petitioner pointed out that the following 5 facilities were required to be provided as per approval plan but not provided, namely; ?1.The Southern side of the building facing Vayalur Road, there are four entrances (two for entry and two for exist)
2.both eastern and western side of the building passage is provided for exit entry
3.Southern side of the building which faces the Vayalur road, there is a common utility area approximately 4,000 sq. ft.
4.Souther side of the building facing Vayalur road, there is a separate space for EB Transformer.
5.There is a separate room for watchman on the western side of the building facing Vayalur Road.?
4.Further, it is submitted that common area have been converted and the ninth respondent has sold it to the eleventh respondent and the entire unauthorized construction should be demolished.
5.The learned standing counsel for the respondent/Corporation submitted that as per sale deed executed in favour of the eleventh respondent, it is seen that the eleventh respondent has not purchased any area in the car parking, but has purchased a flat in the second floor. Be that as it may, we are required to see as to whether the ninth respondent has deviated from the approved building plan. The respondent Municipal has issued notice on 21.07.2014 under Section 282(1 & 2) of Trichy Municipal Corporation Act, 1994 pointing out the following defects:
?(1)mq;fPfupf;fg;gl;l tiuglj;jpy; rpypl; jsj;jpy; 32.61m x 36.00m vd;w mstpw;F gjpyhf 42.06mx42.06m vd;w mstpy; khWjyhfTk; $l;LjyhfTk; fl;blk; fl;b tUfpd;whu;.
(2)mq;fPfupf;fg;gl;l tiuglj;jpy; Kjy; jsj;jpy; 32.61m x 36.00m vd;w mstpw;F gjpyhf 43.28m x 43.28m vd;w mstpy; khWjyhfTk; $l;LjyhfTk; fl;blk; fl;b tUfpd;whu;.
(3) mq;fPfupf;fg;gl;l tiuglj;jpy; tlf;F gf;f jputplk; 5.00 f;F gjpyhf 3.05 vd;w mdty; cs;sJ.?
6.Though the above notice was issued, pointing out the above defects, it is not known as to why the Corporation did not take action in the matter. The second respondent pointed out some defects and mentioned some details on 22.01.2018 under Section 282(3) and 447 of the Act. On receipt of notice, the ninth respondent has submitted a revised plan. Thus, it is clear that if a revised plan has been submitted, it amounts to that the ninth respondent had admitted deviations. Therefore, it is clear that the action initiated by the respondent Corporation is justified and proper. The only thing which disturbs us is that for nearly 4 years, no action has been taken by the Corporation and the Commissioner should look into the matter as to why there is stalemate of the issue. Be that as it may, since the revised plan is pending before the local planning authority, we are constrained to issue direction in the writ petition. So far as the stilt area is concerned, the approval plan indicates it is ear marked for vehicle parking, generator room, lumber room, office, vehicle room, driver rest room, electric room and store. Apart from these features, there can be no other construction in the stilt area. Therefore, local planning authority cannot regularise this deviation as any conversion of the stilt area for a different user would be a totally unauthorised one.
7.Therefore, we direct the respondent Corporation to demolish and remove all the unauthorized constructions in the stilt floor area and restore the place in terms of the approved plan. The above direction should be completed by the respondent Corporation within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order. With regard to other deviations pointed out by the respondent Corporation in the notice dated 22.01.2018, the ninth respondent is given opportunity to pursue the matter before the authority before whom the revised planning permission is pending. No Costs. Consequently, W.M.P.(MD)Nos.2561 and 2562 of 2018 are closed.
To
1.Inspector General of Registration, Registration Department, Santhome, Chennai.
2.Chennai Metropolitan Development Authority (CMDA), Thalamuthu Natarasanar Maligai, Gandhi Irwin Road, Egmore, Chennai-8.
3.The District Collector, Tiruchirappalli District, Trichy.
4.The Local Town Planning Authority, Tiruchirappalli Local Planning Authority, Trichy, Trichy District.
5.The Commissioner, Tiruchirappalli Corporation, Trichy.
6.The Assistant Commissioner, K.Abishekapuram Zone, Tiruchirappalli City Corporation, Tiruchirappalli.
7.The Deputy Director, Trichy Circle, Tamil Nadu Fire and Rescue Service Department, Trichy.
8.The Superintending Engineer, Trichy Electricity Distribution Circle/Metro, TANGEDCO, Mannarpuram, Trichy.
.