The main legal point established in the judgment is that the rules and regulations applicable on the date of the application should be considered for layout plan approval, and amendments introduced after the application date should not be applied retrospectively.

1. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners, as well as the learned counsels appearing on behalf of the respondents.

2. It has been stated that the petitioner companies, intending to form lay outs of residential plots, in the various survey numbers mentioned in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition, in Venkatapuram Village, in Chengelpet Taluk, Kancheepuram District, measuring an extent of 87.97 cents, had submitted an application, dated 15.3.2010, before the second respondent, for the approval of the layout plan, under Rule 3(1) of the Tamilnadu Panchayat Buildings Rules, 1997.

3. It has been further stated that, prior to the submitting of the application, a certificate had been obtained from the Tahsildar, Chengelpet, stating that the lands in question are punja dry lands and that they are patta lands belonging to the petitioner companies. It had also been stated, in the said certificate, that the lands in question are not poramboke lands and that they are not subject to land acquisition proceedings and they are not in risk of inundation by floods.

4. It has also been stated that all the other statutory and regulatory clearances from the authorities concerned had also been obtained, as per the procedures established by law. The petitioner companies had also complied with all the requirements, along with the relevant records, as per the directions of the authorities concerned. However, the application submitted by the petitioner companies, on 15.3.2010, is kept pending, without any orders being passed, till date. While so, the petitioner companies had been informed that the government had amended the Tamil Nadu Town and Country Planning Act, 1971, with effect from 1.1.2011, by inserting a new section, as Section 47- A, according to which prior concurrence of the District Collector concerned is required, for converting wet lands for other uses. The amendment introduced, under Act 46 of 2010, amending the Tamil Nadu Town and Country Planning Act, 1971, had come into effect, as per the Government Order, in G.O.Ms.No.302, Housing and Urban Development Department, dated 29.12.2010, from 1.1.2011. As such, it is clear that Section 47-A of the Tamil Nadu Town and Country Planning Act, 1971, would not be applicable to the application, dated 15.3.2010, submitted by the petitioner companies, for layout approval, as the amendment had been introduced only with effect from 1.1.2011. Therefore, it would not be necessary to obtain the clearance, from the District Collector concerned, for the consideration of the application, by the respondents, for the grant of layout approval in favour of the petitioner companies.

5. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner had relied on the order passed by a Division Bench of this Court, dated 18.4.2011, made in M.P.No.1 of 2011, in W.P.No.8110 of 2011, to support his contention that the amendment introducing Section 47-A in the Tamil Nadu Town and Country Planning Act, 1971, could not be applicable to the application, dated 15.3.2010, submitted by the petitioner companies. Paragraphs 6, 7, 8 and 9 of the order, dated 18.4.2011, read as follows:

"6. While so, the second respondent, has rejected the request of the petitioner on the ground that since majority of the survey numbers are wet lands, only after obtaining the District Collector's approval, application for permission is to be submitted, in terms of G.O.No.302, Housing Development and Urban Development Department.

7. A strong argument has been advanced on the part of the petitioner by the learned senior counsel appearing on their behalf that the application for Planning permission was made by the petitioner as early as on 5.1.2010 and Act 46 of 2010, whereupon much reliance has been placed by the second respondent, was brought into force only with effect from 1.1.2011 and therefore, the provisions of the said amended Act cannot be applied to the application of the petitioner dated 5.1.2010. It has