Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 4, Cited by 54]

Madras High Court

L.K.S.Mohamed Meera Mohaideen vs The Director Of Town And Country ... on 16 April, 2019

Author: G.R.Swaminathan

Bench: G.R.Swaminathan

                                                        1

                          BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

                                              DATED: 16.04.2019

                                                   CORAM:

                            THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.R.SWAMINATHAN

                                          W.P.(MD)No.5652 of 2019


                      L.K.S.Mohamed Meera Mohaideen,
                      Secretary,
                      Al Islam Arts and Science College,
                      Netaji Road, Melapalayam,
                      Tirunelveli District.                             ... Petitioner

                                                       Vs

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

                      2.The Member Secretary,
                        Tirunelveli Local Planning Authority,
                        Xavier Colony, South Outer Road,
                        Tirunelveli.

                      3.The Commissioner,
                        Tirunelveli Corporation,
                        Tirunelveli.                                    ... Respondents

                      PRAYER: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of
                      India to issue a Writ of Declaration, to declare the reservation
                      made in respect of the petitioner's land in ward No.4, Block No.36
                      for the proposed D-D and E1-E1 Scheme Roads under the
                      Melapalayam Detailed Development Plan No.1, to have lapsed in
                      light of Section 38 of the Tamil Nadu Town and Country Planning
                      Act, 1971 (TNACT 35 of 1974) and consequently direct the



http://www.judis.nic.in
                                                         2

                      respondents to accord planning approval for the development of
                      the petitioner's college without insisting the petitioner to donate
                      the said scheme roads free of cost in favour of the third respondent
                      Commissioner.

                                    For Petitioner   : Mr.Mohaboob Athiff for
                                                           Ajmal Associates

                                    For Respondents : Mr.Selvakumar


                                                      ORDER

Heard the learned counsel on either side.

2.The petition mentioned lands were shown in the Melapalayam Detailed Development Plan No.1 which was published in the year 1994. However, no follow up action was taken for acquiring the petition mentioned lands. Therefore, the petitioner has filed this writ petition and he invokes Section 38 of the Tamil Nadu Town and Country Planning Act, 1971.

3.When the matter was taken up for hearing, the learned standing counsel appearing for the respondents contended that in the remarks column, it has been mentioned that the petition mentioned road is to be developed and formed by the owners and that is why the authorities did not initiate steps for acquiring the said lands.

http://www.judis.nic.in 3

4.I am not persuaded by the said submission. The remarks made by the authority are not in consonance with Section 38 of the Tamil Nadu Town and Country Planning Act, 1971. When certain land are sought to be shown as a scheme road, after showing the same, the respondents ought to have acquired the said lands. Otherwise the consequence will be that it would be deemed to have lapsed.

5.The learned standing counsel brought to my notice that the petitioner has given an undertaking affidavit that he would hand over the petition mentioned lands in favour of the local body free of cost. He therefore, wanted this Court to dismiss the writ petition.

6.Section 38 of the Act reads as under :

“38.Release of land.- If within three years from the date of the publication of the notice in the Tamil Nadu Government Gazette under section 26 or section 27-
(a) no declaration as provided in sub-section (2) of section 37 is published in respect of any land reserved, allotted or designated for any purpose specified in a regional plan, master plan, detailed development plan or new town development plan covered by such notice; or http://www.judis.nic.in 4
(b)such land is not acquired by agreement, such land shall be deemed to be released from such reservation, allotment or designation.”

7.Therefore, I hold that since within a period of three years from the date of publishing the detailed development plan, the consequential steps have not been taken, the petition mentioned lands shall be deemed to be released from such reservation. Therefore, the petitioner is entitled to the declaration sought for. However, the writ petition is partly allowed as mentioned above. As regards the other prayer for approval, it is for the petitioner to work out his remedies before the competent forum. No costs.




                                                                    16.04.2019
                      Index    : Yes/No
                      Internet : Yes/No
                      Skm




http://www.judis.nic.in
                          5

                                G.R.SWAMINATHAN, J.

                                                 Skm




                              W.P.(MD)No.5652 of 2019




                                          16.04.2019




http://www.judis.nic.in