SEKAR REPORTER

Court News from Madras High Court

Judges R Subramaniyam and judge kumares babu விதிமீறல் கட்டிடம் மீது ஆண்டுக்கணக்கில் நடவடிக்கை எடுக்காமல் கும்பகர்ணன் போல் தூங்கி கொண்டிருந்தது ஏன்? சென்னை மாநகராட்சிக்கு உயர்நீதிமன்றம் கேள்வி. W.P.No.18272 of 2022 SUBRAMANIAN, J. and K.KUMARESH BABU, J. (Order of the Court was made by R.SUBRAMANIAN,J.) We had in fact required the Commissioner, Chennai Corporation to appear in Court today at 10.30 a.m, since we find that the Law Enforcing Agency viz., Chennai Corporation is not satisfactorily performing its duties and allows persons to violate the planning permission with impunity. 

by ·

விதிமீறல் கட்டிடம் மீது ஆண்டுக்கணக்கில் நடவடிக்கை எடுக்காமல் கும்பகர்ணன் போல் தூங்கி கொண்டிருந்தது ஏன்? சென்னை மாநகராட்சிக்கு உயர்நீதிமன்றம் கேள்வி.

சென்னை கோட்டூர்புரத்தில் உள்ள அடுக்குமாடி குடியிருப்பில் விதிகளை மீறி கட்டிய கட்டுமானங்களுக்கு எதிராக நடவடிக்கை எடுக்கக் கோரி விஜயபாஸ்கர் என்பவர் வழக்கு

மாநகராட்சி ஆணையரை நேரில ஆஜராக நீதிமன்றம் உத்தரவிட்டிருந்தது..

ஆணையரை நேரில ஆஜராக உத்தரவு பிறப்பிபதற்கு காரணமான மனுதாரரை மிரட்டும் வகையில் மாநாகராட்சி அதிகாரிகள் செயல்பட்டுள்ளனர்- நீதிபதிகள்

கட்டிடத்தை சீல் வைத்த போது இருந்த மாநகராட்சி அதிகாரிகள் யார்? காவல் துறை அதிகாரிகள் யார்? என்ற விவரங்களை நவம்பர் 7ம் தேதி தாக்கல் செய்ய மாநகராட்சி ஆணையருக்கு உயர்நீதிமன்றம் உத்தரவு

நீதிபதிகள் ஆர்.சுப்பிரமணியன் மற்றும் குமரேஷ்பாபு

 

W.P.No.18272 of 2022

  1. SUBRAMANIAN, J.

and

K.KUMARESH BABU, J.

(Order of the Court was made by R.SUBRAMANIAN,J.)

We had in fact required the Commissioner, Chennai Corporation to appear in Court today at 10.30 a.m, since we find that the Law Enforcing Agency viz., Chennai Corporation is not satisfactorily performing its duties and allows persons to violate the planning permission with impunity.

  1. In the case on hand itself though the sanctioned plan is only for about 5000 sq.ft, the entire building that has been constructed as of today measures about 12,000 sq.ft. This could not have been accomplished without the active collision of the officers of the Chennai Corporation, which is the Law Enforcing Agency.  We had required the Commissioner to appear only to find out as to how the responsibility of controlling the deviated constructions is being carried out by the Corporation.
  2. However, since the learned counsel for the Corporation mentioned in the after noon stating that in view of heavy rain and flood situation, the Commissioner’s presence may be excused and instead he would file an affidavit explaining the procedure adopted. Believing the said request to be reasonable and genuine, we had dispensed with the presence of the Commissioner and required the Commissioner to file an affidavit setting out the procedure that is being adopted by the Corporation to enforce or to prevent the violations of building permission granted by it.
  3. Thereafter, the learned counsel for the petitioner mentioned yesterday morning (03.11.2022) stating that about 10 officials from the Corporation along with the Police force had ascended at the building on 02.11.2022evening and has sealed the premises. A video footage of the sealing process was also produced before us.  Hence, we had directed the matter to be posted ‘for being mentioned’ today.  Today, we had seen the video footage produced by the learned counsel for the petitioner.

 

  1. J.Ravindran, learned Additional Advocate General who appears for the Chennai Corporation would claim that everything was done as per law. He also sated that he has a video footage of the happenings in the premises on

02.11.2022 evening.

  1. We are at loss to understand as to what forced the Corporation which was sleeping like a Kumbakarna from 1997 till 2022 to ascend in the building on the very same evening we passed the order requiring the Commissioner’s appearance.

 

  1. The learned counsel for the petitioner would claim that one of the Officers claimed that it is because of you, one IAS officer has been summoned to the Court you will learn it the hard way. He also has a audio recording.
  2. The learned counsel is directed to hand over the video and audio recording to the Registrar (IT-cum-Statistics) who is present in Court, who will have the video and audio recording transcribed to the storage device, either pen drive or CD and preserve it.
  3. J.Ravindran, learned Additional Advocate General would also claim that he has got a 3 hours video footage.
  4. We are left to wonder as to why it took 3 hours to seal the premises. According to us the very sealing process undertaken on 02.11.2022 is just a measure adopted by the Corporation to threaten the petitioner. Whatever be the claim of the Corporation, we record our dis-satisfaction on the behavior of the officials of the Corporation.  We therefore require the commissioner, Chennai Corporation to file an affidavit mentioning the names of the officials who were present at the time of sealing the premises.  He shall also name the police officials who were present at the time of sealing the premises on 02.11.2022.  Such an affidavit shall be filed on 07.11.2022.
  5. The only complaint against the petitioner is that the premises for which permission has been obtained for residential use is been used as non-residential premises. While admitting such user, the learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that he would ensure dis-continuance of the user of the premises for commercial purpose within a period of 15 days from today.
  6. Hence, the Corporation is directed to de-seal the entire ground floor, first floor and second floor of the premises forthwith. Since the third floor is in total violation of the planning permission, we are not directing to de-seal the same.
  7. The petitioner shall restore the premises to its original position within a period of 15 days and use it for residential purpose only. The toilet situate in the

set back is stated to have been removed.  As regards the other deviations by the 4th respondent, the 4th respondent would submit that she has filed an appeal under Section 80A.  It is for the Government to dispose of the same.  An application for regularization is also said to be pending.  Hence, we are not passing any direction regarding de-sealing of the premises.

  1. If the petitioner fails to bring the ground floor premises in conformity with the plan the same will be taken note of and further action will be taken by the Corporation.

 

  1. Post on 07.11.2022.

      (R.S.M., J.)       (K.B., J.)

04.11.2022

dsa

Note:-

Issue order copy today i.e., 04.11.2022.

  1. SUBRAMANIAN, J. and K.KUMARESH BABU, J.

dsa

 

 

W.P.No.18272 of 2022

04.11.2022

 

 

You may also like...