Unauthorised constructions warrant stringent and drastic action.

F.M. Ibrahim Kalifulla, J.

These two writ petitions are Public Interest Litigations preferred by a practising advocate of this Court. In the above writ petitions, the petitioner seeks for a direction to respondents 1 to 4 for taking necessary legal action for demolition of all illegal and unauthorised constructions built in violation of Section 217-B of the Tamil Nadu District Municipalities Act, 1920 and the Town and Country Planning Act, 1971 in four Taluks, namely, Ooty, Gudalur, Kothagiri and Coonur of Nilgiris District.

2. In M.P.Nos.1 and 2 of 2007 in W.P.No.32855 of 2007, the petitioner seeks for an interim direction to respondents 1 to 5 for filing a detailed report as to the number of buildings which were constructed in violation of the planning rules in the above referred to Taluks. Similarly, such interim directions were sought for in M.P.No.1 and 2 of 2007 in W.P.No.32747 of 2007 and also for a direction to disconnect power, water and sewerage connections.

3. When these writ petitions came up for hearing on 111. 2007, interim directions were issued to respondents 5 and 6 in W.P.No.32747 of 2007 and 6 and 7 in W.P.No.32855 of 2007 restraining them from granting electricity/water service connection to any building or farm house or any structure which have been constructed without any sanctioned plan.

4. Subsequently, by order, dated 12. 2007, taking note of the affidavit filed by the third respondent-Commissioner (W.P.No.32747 of 2007), where certain details were furnished as regards different classifications such as residential zone, agricultural zone, water bodies etc. and also total number of unauthorised constructions made after 1993, the Commissioner was directed to file a comprehensive affidavit in respect of the following:-

.a. Details of the demolition process carried out in respect of the unauthorised constructions in the agricultural lands/town area of Udhagamandalam.

.b. The status of the criminal cases filed in the Judicial Magistrates Court. Copies of orders, if any, passed therein also to be furnished.

.c. Particulars of the writ petitions and civil revision petitions pending in this Court in respect of the unauthorised constructions.

.d. Particulars of review petitions pending with the Government.

5. The District Collector, Udhagamandalam, was also directed to file a detailed affidavit in respect of the unauthorised constructions in Udhagamandalam and surrounding areas of Nilgiris. Thereafter, further affidavit was filed by the third respondent, District Collector (W.P.No.32855 of 2007), dated 1. 2008. In both the writ petitions, along with the affidavits, the third respondent also filed two booklets, one booklet containing all those unauthorised construction made between 1993 and 2007 and another booklet containing the steps taken by way of demolition, prosecution etc. as well as certain pending litigations as against the notices issued for demolition. Thereafter, the petitioner filed his memo of objection to the counter affidavit. He also placed before us a set of photographs said to have been taken by him on 211. 2007 and according to the petitioner, with reference to those buildings which have been constructed beyond ground and first floor in violation of the provisions of Chapter X-A of the Tamil Nadu District Municipalities Act (V of 1920) which governs and regulates constructions in Hill Stations and with reference to which the District Collector failed to furnish the details before this Court.

6. While making his submissions, the petitioner placed reliance upon the provisions contained in Chapter X-A of the District Municipalities Act as well as the Tamil Nadu District Municipalities (Hill Stations) Buildings Rules, 1993, apart from relying upon the decisions of the Division Bench of this Court reported in 1995-2-Writ L.R. 737 ( Palani Hills Conservation Council rep. by its President Navroz Mody Vs. The State of Tamil Nadu rep. by its Secretary to Government, Rural De