Madras High Court
K.Vinoth Kumar vs The Secretary To Government on 22 February, 2019
Author: M. Duraiswamy
Bench: V.K.Tahilramani, M.Duraiswamy
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 22.02.2019
CORAM :
THE HON'BLE MRS.V.K.TAHILRAMANI, CHIEF JUSTICE
AND
The HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M.DURAISWAMY
Review Application (Writ) No.12 of 2019
and W.M.P.No.40030 of 2018
and W.M.P.No.3555 of 2019
K.Vinoth Kumar .. Petitioner
v.
1.The Secretary to Government,
rep. by its Secretary,
Housing and Urban Development Department,
Fort St. George,
Chennai-600 009.
2.The Principal Secretary/Member Secretary,
Chennai Metropolitan Development Authority,
No.1, Gandhi Irwin Road, Egmore,
Chennai – 600 008.
3.The Executive Engineer,
Greater Chennai Corporation,
Zone-XIII, Adyar,
Chennai-600 020. .. Respondents
Review Applications filed under Section 114 read with Order 47
Rule 1 of Civil Procedure Code against the order dated 06.12.2018
http://www.judis.nic.in
made in W.P.No.31963 of 2018.
2
For Petitioner : Mr.L.Chandrakumar
For Respondents :Mr.S.Kamalesh Kannan
Govt. Advocate – for r1
Mr.S.Thiruvengadam – for R2
Mr.V.C.Selvasekaran – for R3
ORDER
(Order of the Court was made by The Hon'ble Chief Justice) This Court, by order dated 06.12.2018, dismissed the Writ Petition in W.P.No,31963 of 2018 . The petitioner has filed the above Review Application to review the order dated 06.12.2018.
2. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has challenged the order dated 16.10.2017 passed by the respondent No.1 in the appeal filed under Section 80-A of the Tamil Nadu Town and Country Planning Act and also the order dated 25.10.2018 passed by the respondent No.1 in an application filed under Section 81 of the Act to review the order passed under section 80-A of the Act and that this Court has not considered the order dated 16.10.2017, while dismissing the Writ Petition. http://www.judis.nic.in 3
3. On a careful consideration of the materials available on record and the submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, it could be seen that we have considered the order dated 16.10.2017 and also the order dated 25.10.2018 passed by the respondent No.1 in the Writ Petition while dismissing the same.
4. With regard to the order dated 25.10.2018, in para-3 of the order, we have specifically stated that a Review Application filed under Section 81 of the Tamil Nadu Town and Country Planning Act cannot be filed to review an order passed under Section 80-A of the said Act.
5. With regard to the order dated 16.10.2017 passed under section 80-A of the Act, in an appeal preferred against the Locking and Sealing Notice, in para-7, we have stated that the petitioner has not furnished any valid evidence to show that he can occupy the land and construct houses and in the absence of the same, it has to be concluded that the petitioner has encroached the said land. That apart, the petitioner has not furnished any document when the appeal http://www.judis.nic.in 4 under Section 80-A was being heard and decided. Apart from this, we have also stated that though the respondent No.1 has passed the order in the appeal filed under Section 80-A of the Act as early as on 16.10.2017, the petitioner filed the Writ Petition after a lapse of more than a year and the petitioner has not given any reason for not challenging the order dated 16.10.2017 at the earliest point of time. The Writ Petition was filed by the petitioner only on 29.11.2018.
6. Considering both the orders, i.e., the order dated 16.10.2017 and 25.10.2018 passed by the respondent No.1, we have dismissed the Writ Petition.
7. Under order 47 Rule 1 of Civil Procedure Code, unless the petitioner is able to point out an error apparent on the face of the record, a Review Application cannot be entertained. We do not find any error apparent on the face of the record warranting interference in the present Review Application. The petitioner cannot be allowed to http://www.judis.nic.in 5 re-argue the matter under the guise of Review Application. In these circumstances, the Review Application is devoid of merits and the same is dismissed. No costs. Consequently, the connected Miscellaneous petitions are closed.
(MRS.V.K.TAHILRAMANI, CHIEF JUSTICE) (M.DURAISWAMY)
22.02.2019
Index : Yes/No
Speaking Order/Non Speaking Order
Rj
To
1.The Secretary to Government,
rep. by its Secretary,
Housing and Urban Development Department, Fort St. George, Chennai-600 009.
2.The Principal Secretary/Member Secretary, Chennai Metropolitan Development Authority, No.1, Gandhi Irwin Road, Egmore, Chennai – 600 008.
3.The Executive Engineer, Greater Chennai Corporation, Zone-XIII, Adyar, Chennai-600 020.
http://www.judis.nic.in 6 THE HON'BLE MRS.V.K.TAHILRAMANI CHIEF JUSTICE AND M. DURAISWAMY,J.
Rj Review Application (Writ) No.12 of 2019 and W.M.P.No.40030 of 2018 and W.M.P.No.3555 of 2019 22.02.2019 http://www.judis.nic.in