Madras High Court
S.Ponnusamy vs The Director Of Town & Country Planning on 12 December, 2022
Author: N.Sathish Kumar
Bench: N.Sathish Kumar
WP.No.30168 of 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 12.12.2022
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.SATHISH KUMAR
W.P.No.30168 of 2022 &
W.M.P.No.29601 of 2022
1. S.Ponnusamy
2. C.Subramaniam
3. D.Sumathi
4. D.Dhanasekaran ... Petitioners
Vs
1. The Director of Town & Country Planning,
Office of Directorate of Town & Country Planning,
Second, Third and Fourth Floors, E & C Market Road,
Koyambedu, Chennai – 600 107.
2. The Member Secretary,
Tirupur, Local Planning Authority,
1st Floor, Kumaran Commercial Complex,
Tiruppur – 641 601.
3. The Commissioner
Tiruppur Municipal Corporation,
Tiruppur.
4. The Land Acquisition Officer,
Tiruppur. ... Respondents
1/9
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
WP.No.30168 of 2022
Prayer:- Writ Petition filed under the Article 226 of Constitution of India,
to issue a Writ of Declaration to declare that the property to the 1.05 ½
acres in Old Ward – C, Block – 1, TS.No.9/2A & 9/28, [New Ward-C,
Block -5, TS Nos.7, 17/1, 17/2, 17/3] Tiruppur North Taluk, Tiruppur
Corporation, Tiruppur forming part of Tiruppur Detailed Development Plan
No.6, approved by the Director of Town and Country Planning vide
proceedings Roc No.711/2006/DP2 dated 26.0.2007 and delineated in Map
No.5 in DDP[V]/DTCP No.13/2007 and consented by Director of Town
and Country Planning under section 25 of the Tamil Nadu Town and
Country Planning Act 1971 for construction of “Lorry Parking and BB 80
feet Scheme road” vide proceedings in Roc No.711/2006/DP2 dated 26-04-
2007 and published in the Tamil Nadu Government Gazette No.20, Part
VI-Section , Page No.233 dated 29.05.2007 by the first respondent herein,
to have lapsed in the light of the Section 38 of the Tamilnadu Town and
Country Planning Act, 1971 [TN Act 35 of 1974, and the decision of this
Court in the case of Kannabiran Vs. The Director Town and Country
Planning, in W.P. [MD] No.8515 of 2021 dated 25.06.2021.
For Petitioners : Mr.Pugazh Gandhi P.
For Respondents : Mr.V.Nanmaran,
Additional Government Pleader – R1 & R4
Ms.P.Shanthi – R2 & R3
2/9
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
WP.No.30168 of 2022
ORDER
This writ petition has been filed to declare that the property in 1.05 ½ acres in Old Ward – C, Block – 1, TS.No.9/2A & 9/28, [New Ward-C, Block -5, TS Nos.7, 17/1, 17/2, 17/3] Tiruppur North Taluk, Tiruppur Corporation, Tiruppur forming part of Tiruppur Detailed Development Plan No.6, approved by the Director of Town and Country Planning vide proceedings Roc No.711/2006/DP2 dated 26.04.2007 and delineated in Map No.5 in DDP[V]/DTCP No.13/2007 to have lapsed in the light of Section 38 of the Tamil Nadu Town and Country Planning Act, 1971.
2. The case of the petitioners is that they are the owner of the subject property by virtue of the document Nos.842/2006, 844/2006 and 510/2009 87/2005 and 1737/2019 on the file of the Sub Registrar- I, Tiruppur.. The further case of the petitioners is that patta was also granted in his favour. The petitioners wanted to develop his property and they had approached the respondents and they were informed that the plan sanction will not be given since detailed development plan has already been notified under 3/9 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis WP.No.30168 of 2022 Section 37 of the Act and the concerned place is reserved for a proposed scheme road under the detailed development plan. Aggrieved by the same, the present writ petition has been filed before this Court.
3. Heard, Mr.P.Puhazh Gandhi, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and Mr.V.Nanmaran, learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the first and fourth respondents.
4. The main issue that has been urged before this Court is that the detailed development plan has lapsed as per Section 38 of the Tamil Nadu Town and Country Planning Act, since the land has not been acquired within a period of three years from the date of publication of the notice under the Tamil Nadu Gazette.
5. It is not necessary for this Court to dwell much on the entire allegation in the Writ Petition, since for the very same detailed development scheme, a Division Bench of this Court in W.A (MD) No.485 of 2020 has held that the scheme had lapsed by virtue of Section 38 of the Tamil Nadu Town and Country Planning Act. The relevant portions in the judgment are 4/9 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis WP.No.30168 of 2022 extracted hereunder :-
“11. As rightly pointed out by the learned counsel appearing for the respondents/writ petitioners that the counter affidavit proceeds on the merits of the claim and in no way deal with deemed lapse and in the considered opinion of this Court, the learned Judge, on correct appreciation of facts and by applying the legal position as enumerated in the above said judgment, allowed the writ petition. This Court, on going through the reasons assigned in the impugned order, is of the considered view that there is no infirmity or error apparent on the face of the record for the reason assigned by the learned Single Judge for allowing the writ petition and finds that the writ appeal lacks merits.
12. It is also brought to the knowledge of this Court that the writ appeal filed by the official respondents in WA(MD) No.340 of 2020, against the order dated 27.02.2017 in W.P.(MD) No.14456 of 2014 was also dismissed on 02.03.2020.”
6. This Court has consistently held that if the land has not been acquired within a period of three years from the date of publishing the detailed development plan in the Gazette, the concerned lands shall be deemed to be released from such reservation. It will be beneficial to provide 5/9 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis WP.No.30168 of 2022 the details of the cases, wherein this Court had reached such a conclusion :
1. M.Amsavalli v. Director of Town and Country Planning reported in (2017) 2 CWC 418.
2. RM.Shanmuganathan v. Director of Town and Country Planning reported in (2018) 2 CWC 20.
3. W.P.(MD) No.5652 of 2019 (LKS Mohammed Meera Mohaideen v. Director of Town and Country Planning)
4. W.A.(MD) No.485 of 2020 (The Director of Town and Country Planning and another v. Muthu and others) and
5. W.P.(MD) No.166 of 2021 (Nagendran v. The Director of Town and Country Planning).
Section 38 of the Tamilnadu Town and Country Planning Act reads as follows :
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 (b) such land is not acquired by agreement, 6/9 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis WP.No.30168 of 2022 such land shall be deemed to be released from such reservation, allotment or designation.
7. In the present case, the detailed development plan was notified under Section 37 of the Act in the year 2007. However, the respondents failed to take any steps to acquire the land and therefore, by operation of Section 38, the scheme lapsed.
8. In the result, the property belonging to the petitioners has to be released from the detailed development plan scheme, since it has lapsed under Section 38 of the Act.
9. Accordingly, this writ petition is allowed. Consequently connected miscellaneous petition is closed. No costs.
12.12.2022 vrc To, 7/9 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis WP.No.30168 of 2022
1. The Director of Town & Country Planning, Office of Directorate of Town & Country Planning, Second, Third and Fourth Floors, E & C Market Road, Koyambedu, Chennai – 600 107.
2. The Member Secretary, Tirupur, Local Planning Authority, 1st Floor, Kumaran Commercial Complex, Tiruppur – 641 601.
3. The Commissioner Tiruppur Municipal Corporation, Tiruppur.
4. The Land Acquisition Officer, Tiruppur.
8/9 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis WP.No.30168 of 2022 N.SATHISH KUMAR, J.
vrc WP.No.30168 of 2022 12.12.2022 9/9 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis