JUDGMENT (Prayer: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, for issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to quash the Letter No.SS/2757/2007 dated 30.05.2017 issued by the 5th respondent to the petitioner and consequently direct the respondents 4 to 6 to provide Emergency Exit Entrance at east corner side of “Varun Apartment” Block 50, 144 HIG Scheme, Venugopal Street, Mogapair, Chennai - 600 037.) 1. The Writ Petition has been filed challenging the letter issued by the 5th respondent in Letter No.SS/2757/2007 dated 30.05.2017. 2. This Writ Petition is also for issuing a direction to the respondents 4 to 6 to provide Emergency Exit Entrance at east corner side of “Varun Apartment” Block 50, 144 HIG Scheme, Venugopal Street, Mogapair, Chennai - 600 037. 3. The brief facts of the case as averred in the petition are as follows: i) The petitioner is the President of Varun Apartment Owners Welfare Association. The 4th respondent had given a revised Site Plan to the owners of the Varun Apartments at the time of purchasing the house, wherein, it was clearly mentioned and demarcated the open space for Emergency Exit Entrance for the people residing at Block No.50, 144 HIG Scheme, Venugopal Street, Mogapair, Chennai - 600 037. The alleged plan for Emergency Exit Entrance at East Corner of the apartment was kept vacant space. However, during the month of February 2017, the 2nd respondent had started work for opening park in adjacent space as demarcated as OSR-1 and OSR-2 in the Revised Site Plan Map issued by the 4th respondent. But, the 2nd respondent has been grabbing the vacant space measuring to an extent of 96 meter demarcated for Emergency Exit Entrance in the revised Site Plan issued by the 4th respondent. ii) The act of the 2nd respondent was questioned by the petitioner and he was informed that a new plan was drawn by the 3rd respondent, wherein, the alleged Emergency Exit Entrance space shown as OSR-3 in the map. The petitioner had sent a letter to the respondents officials requesting to provide Emergency Exit Entrance at the east side of their apartment, and in the meanwhile, he had measured the entire UDS land of the apartments, wherein, he had found that there was a shortage of 59.64 sq.mt out of the total extent of 3126.24 sq.mt allotted by the 4th respondent. In this regard, the petitioner had sent a letter to the respondents officials to provide details and measurements of the entire UDS land, but there was no reply received from the respondents in respect of the shortage of the said land. iii) The petitioner in his dated 14.06.2017 had stated the purpose for which the Emergency Entrance required to the residents of the Apartments and also that the vacant space was converted as OSR-3 without giving any notice to the residents of the Apartments. But, the respondents had rejected his request stating that the land which has been shown as OSR-3 in the above said map cannot be converted as pathway to the residents of the apartments. Aggrieved by the same, the above Writ Petition has been filed by the petitioner. 4. The respondents 4 to 6, in their counter, submitted that the Tamil Nadu Housing Board handed over the site plan at the time of handing over the flats to the petitioner's association. In that document, the Tamil Nadu Housing Board had never demarcated the open space for emergency entrance to the petitioner flats. It was also submitted that the Tamil Nadu Housing Board has given a approved planning permission layout of the above said flats, as per the request made by the petitioner, wherein, the CMDA has earmarked the vacant lands excluding the building as the open space reservation for public utility like parks and other OSR purpose. The petitioner mentioned land was earmarked by the CMDA as OSR-3 vide planning permission approval No.551/2010 dated 12.05.2010. In which, the entrances for the above said flats were provided by the CMDA as per the norms prescribed for residential flats. 5. It was also submitted in the counter that the subject lands of OSR- 1, OSR-2 and OSR-3 were handed over to the local body for further maintenance by the Tamil Nadu Housing Board. The officials of Ambattur Municipality has initiated the construction of park in the above said OSR lands. The respondents have provided all the details sought for by the petitioner vide letter dated 14.03.2018 and they have never allocated the above said vacant lands to the petitioner association as emergency exit entrance for their flats. 6. The officials of Ambattur Municipality has initiated the construction of park in the above said OSR lands. The respondents have provided all the details sought for by the petitioner vide letter dated 14.03.2018 and they have never allocated the above said vacant lands to the petitioner association as emergency exit entrance for their flats. 6. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner mainly would submit that, though the eastern side of the areas are developed as a park, its one of the compound walls is on the western side and now there is no room for the residents to exit from the apartment, in case of emergency. Therefore, he would submit a separate gate has to be provided on the eastern side of the apartment for emergency purpose. According to him, the emergency exit will not be used as a pathway. The gate would be kept locked in all the time, and only during the emergency period, it would be opened. Therefore, he would submit that mere providing such a gate on the eastern side of the apartment will not cause any disturbance to anyone. Whereas, the learned counsels appearing for Corporation and Tamil Nadu Housing Board would submit that the petitioner apartment is situated on the western side of the park with a separate gate for entrance at the northern side from Venugopal Street. The entire eastern side which reflected as a open space has now been converted as OSR-3 and a park has been developed in the said area for the use of General Public. Hence, the petitioner cannot be provided any emergency exit in the said OSR and the same is not permissible under law. 7. I have perused the entire material, particularly, the Inspection Report as well as the Plan showing the OSR land near the petitioner apartment. 8. On perusal of the plan which is on dispute, the petitioner apartment is on the western side and its main gate is on the northern side. The petitioner now seeks emergency exit entrance on the eastern side of the apartment where the OSR land is situated and park has been developed. 9. It is relevant to note that the petitioner apartment is situated in the Venugopal Cross Street. The petitioner now seeks emergency exit entrance on the eastern side of the apartment where the OSR land is situated and park has been developed. 9. It is relevant to note that the petitioner apartment is situated in the Venugopal Cross Street. When the grievance of the petitioner is that the single gate provided in the apartment may not be sufficient during the emergency time for exit, this Court is of the view that, from the Venugopal Cross Street, the petitioner can very well make other gates also for emergency exit. Hence, the contention of the petitioner that eastern side emergency exit is required cannot be countenanced. When the eastern side is already demarcated and classified as OSR and park has been developed, apart from one pathway for the park, a new pathway cannot be created in the said area. Hence, this Court is of the view that the contention of the petitioner that emergency exit entrance to be provided in the eastern side cannot be countenanced, since the OSR land cannot be put into for any other purpose. If at all the petitioner is advised, the petitioner can very well place number of gates in the northern side for easy access for exit from the apartment towards Venugopal Street at the time of emergency. 10. In view of the above, this Writ Petition is dismissed. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.