Research › Search › Judgment

Madras High Court · body

2023 DIGILAW 948 (MAD)

M. Kesavan v. District Collector, Erode

2023-03-08

V.LAKSHMINARAYANAN, V.M.VELUMANI

body2023
JUDGMENT (Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondent nos.3 and 4 to remove the illegal and unauthorised construction of the 8th and 9th respondents in the agricultural zone i.e. S.Nos.457 and 458, Revenue Colony, Sottaiyampalayam, Suriyampalayam Village, R.N.Pudur, Erode as per proceeding of the 6th respondent in Na.Ka.No.225/2017 Cpunavaku dated 03.04.2017 by appreciating the above stated facts and circumstances.) V.M. Velumani, J. 1. The petitioner has come forward with the present writ petition seeking for a direction to the respondents 3 and 4 to remove the illegal and unauthorised construction of the eighth and nineth respondents in the agricultural zone i.e. S.Nos.457 and 458, Revenue Colony, Sottaiyampalayam, Suriyampalayam Village, R.N.Pudur, Erode, as per the Proceedings of the sixth respondent in Na.Ka.No.225/2017 Cpunavaku dated 03.04.2017. 2. The petitioner is a resident of Revenue Colony, Sottaiyampalayam, R.N.Pudur (PO) Erode. The respondents 8 and 9 are the adjacent owners and started putting up construction in S.Nos.457 and 458/3 for establishing Yarn sizing industrial factory, which falls under agricultural zone. The petitioner made an application dated 03.02.2017 to the RTI Officer of Chithode Pudhu Nagar Development Authority seeking the details of land classification. The petitioner has also obtained information that the land in question is classified as Agricultural Use Zone – Town Planning. Subsequently, on the representation given by the petitioner, the sixth respondent, inspected the property on 03.04.2017 and found that there is some unauthorised construction. Accordingly, the sixth respondent, vide Proceedings dated 03.04.2017, directed the third respondent to initiate action against the unauthorised construction. Since the third respondent has not taken any action against the unauthorised construction, the petitioner has come out with the present writ petition. 3. Heard the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner; learned Additional Government Pleader for the respondents 1, 2, 4, 6 and 7; learned counsel for the third respondent and the learned counsel for the fifth respondent. 4. Though the eighth and nineth respondents entered appearance through counsel, when the matter is taken up for hearing today, there is no representation on behalf of the respondents 8 and 9. 5. 4. Though the eighth and nineth respondents entered appearance through counsel, when the matter is taken up for hearing today, there is no representation on behalf of the respondents 8 and 9. 5. The learned counsel for the third respondent submitted that the third respondent has inspected the property and having found that the construction put up by the respondent nos.8 and 9 is unauthorised, issued notice dated 16.02.2017 under Section 296(1) of the Erode City Municipal Corporation Act, 2008, to stop the unauthorised construction and to demolish the unauthorised construction. Subsequently, the third respondent, issued notice under Sections 56 and 57 read with Section 85 of the Tamil Nadu Town and Country Planning Act, 1971, on 14.12.2017, for locking and sealing the premises and to demolish and restore the land to its original condition before the said unauthorised construction. However, in view of the pendency of the writ petition, the third respondent is not taking any action against the respondents 8 and 9 and thus, sought for suitable orders from this Court. 6. The learned counsel for the fifth respondent submitted that as per the instruction of the third respondent, they have already disconnected the electricity service connection on 28.12.2015. 7. In view of the above submissions, the third respondent is directed to proceed further on the unauthorised construction put up by the respondents 8 and 9, in pursuance of the notice dated 14.12.2017 of the third respondent and take appropriate action against the respondents 8 and 9, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and file a report before this Court. 8. The writ petition is disposed of with the above directions. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed. 9. Post this matter after eight weeks under the caption “for reporting compliance”.