Judgment :- 1. Writ Petition is filed praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents 1 and 2 to entertain, consider and grant the approval to the demolition and reconstruction, planning permit and building approval for the new construction Survey Nos.1216/1B Part, 1216/2B part and 1216/2B1 and 2B2, T.S.No.14 and Block No.77 of Korattur Village, M.I.G. Block No.M26 and M27 of East Avenue, Korattur, Chennai-600 080 measuring 5 grounds 2350 square feet without insisting the No Objection Certificate from the third respondent or any other Authority so long as the proposed new construction is in accordance with the Development Rules. 2. Mr.C.Kathiravan, learned counsel takes notice on behalf of the first respondent; Mr.V.Bharathidasan, learned counsel takes notice on behalf of the second respondent and Mr.A.Vijayakumar, learned counsel takes notice on behalf of the third respondent. By consent, the writ petition is taken up for final disposal. 3. Petitioner is the promoter engaged in building construction. This petition is filed on behalf of the owners of the property which was originally developed by Tamil Nadu Housing Board and sold to the individuals. The present owners are either original allottees or subsequent purchasers. The undisputed fact is that the Tamil Nadu Housing Board has no lien over the property. For the purpose of developing the property, the first respondent orally insisted the petitioners that no objection certificate issued by the Tamil Nadu Housing Board should be submitted along with the application for the purpose of demolition, planning permission and for issuance of planning and building permit to put up new construction. 4. Similar issue with regard to the insistence of no objection certificate from Tamil Nadu Housing Board was considered by a Division Bench of this Court in W.A.No.1052 of 2007 (The Managing Director - vs. - Lancor G:Crop Properties Limited & another) where it has been clearly held that the Housing Board has no right over property developed and sold to the individual allottees. The only restriction appears to be that the property developed for residential purpose should not be commercial use. The petitioner's plea is only for demolition and reconstruction as residential property. 5. Petitioner's counsel states that the development of the property is for residential use only and petitioner is willing to file an affidavit to that effect. The only restriction appears to be that the property developed for residential purpose should not be commercial use. The petitioner's plea is only for demolition and reconstruction as residential property. 5. Petitioner's counsel states that the development of the property is for residential use only and petitioner is willing to file an affidavit to that effect. Following the Division Bench Judgment as above, several orders have been passed by this Court, viz., W.P.No.15170 of 2010 dated 20.7.2010, W.P.No.14784 of 2008 dated 6.8.2008 where the Chennai Metropolitan Development Authorities were directed to accept the application without insisting on no objection certificate. 6. Since the property in question undisputedly has been sold to the individual allottees by way of proper sale deeds, the Tamil Nadu Housing Board can have no right over the property and therefore, the question of issuing no objection certificate does not arise. 7. In view of the above, the first respondent is directed to proceed with the application submitted by the petitioner without insisting no objecting certificate from the third respondent Tamil Nadu Housing Board subject to condition that the property will be developed only for residential purpose. The petitioner, however, is directed to submit the individual sale deeds of all the land owners and other relevant documents to the competent authority to get planning permission. The Writ Petition is ordered as above. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.