1. The Petitioner has projected the present instant Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus praying for an issuance of order by this Court in calling for the records relating to the impugned order dated 21.09.2011 passed by the First Respondent in proceedings No.PPA/197/Z(SB)/(4) 2011/4103 and to quash the same. Further, he has also sought for issuance of an order in directing the First Respondent to consider the Petitioner's application dated 02.02.2011 for granting approval to construct the three storied commercial building at R.S.No.65/1, 65/3 and 65/5, East Coast Road, Saram Revenue Village, Oulgaret Municipality, Puducherry.

2. According to the Petitioner, he is the absolute owner of the property comprised in R.S.No.65/1, 65/3 and 65/5, East Coast Road, Saram Revenue Village, Oulgaret Municipality, Puducherry by means of Partition Deed dated 22.08.1972 in respect of R.S.No.65/1 and R.S.No.65/5 (corresponding cadastre No.1375 and 1386) and by means of Release Deed dated 02.02.1996 in respect of R.S.No.65/3 (corresponding cadastre No.1385).

3. The Germane Facts of the Writ Petition:

The stand of the Petitioner is that he applied for planning permission before the First Respondent on 02.02.2011 to construct three storied commercial building in the aforesaid property and also paid necessary application fees to the first respondent. He received communication on 11.03.2011 from the First Respondent/Member Secretary, The Puducherry Planning Authority, Puducherry wherein it was stated that one (Malaiappan @ Thangaraj) filed a suit in O.S.No.215 of 2008 on the file of the II Additional District Munsif Court, Puducherry for the relief of declaration and recovery of possession. In the said suit, the Second Respondent filed I.A.No.552 of 2008 praying for injunction restraining the Respondents and others not to put up construction in the property. On receipt of communication, he sent an explanation through Advocate by on 12.03.2011 by narrating the fact that R.S.No.65/1, 65/3 and 65/5 are not the subject matter of the suit property filed in O.S.No.215 of 2008. Moreover, it was also stated that the Petitioner is the absolute owner of the property in question. The First Respondent received his explanation on 14.03.2011. But, to his shock, he received an impugned order dated 21.09.2011 from the First Respondent stating that application seeking for approval for construction of three storied commercial building in respect of R.S.No.65/1, 65/3 and 65/5, East Coast Road, Saram Revenue Village, Oulgaret Municipality, Puducherry can be considered only after the outcome of the judgment in O.S.No.215 of 2008 on the file of the II Additional District Munsif Court, Puducherry.

4. The Learned counsel for the Petitioner urges before this Court that the First Respondent/Member Secretary, The Puducherry Planning Authority, Puducherry has passed the impugned order dated 21.09.2011 without application of mind and also without considering the Petitioner's explanation dated 12.03.2011. Further more, it is represented on behalf of the Petitioner that the Second Respondent filed the suit in O.S.No.215 of 2008 on the file of the trial court as regards property comprised in R.S.Nos.65/1A, 1/B, 1A/B and other items of properties.

5. According to the Learned counsel for the Petitioner, the Petitioner understands that one Soundararajan, who was the panel Advocate for the First Respondent appeared against the writ petitioner in respect of the same property in O.S.No.1919 of 2006 on the file of the I Additional District Munsif Court, Puducherry. It appears that First Respondent had obtained a legal opinion from the same counsel and passed the impugned order as such the said order is liable to be quashed in the eye of law and also that the said order has been passed with a malafide intention and at the instigation of the Second Respondent.

6. The main grievance of the Petitioner is that the First Respondent/Member Secretary, The Puducherry Planning Authority, Puducherry