1. Introductory:

Though there are stringent provisions under the Tamil Nadu Town and Country Planning Act, 1971, to discourage construction of unauthorized buildings and in spite of several actions taken by Chennai Metropolitan Development Authority (hereinafter referred to as “CMDA”) to demolish the illegal constructions and various orders passed by the High Court and Supreme Court, condemning such violations, the builders like the third respondent herein, continue to flout the building regulations with impunity.

The facts:

2. The petitioner entered into a lease agreement with the third respondent on 11.2.2011 to conduct hotel business in the building constructed in R.S. No. 3680/48, D. No. 552, T.T.K. Road, Alwarpet, Chennai. The building comprising stilt and 5 floors with a terrace was constructed by the third respondent on the strength of the permit issued by the CMDA. The petitioner, after executing the lease, completed the interior work and made it fit for running a hotel.

3. While so, the Chennai Corporation issued a notice dated 15.7.2011, informing the petitioner and the third respondent that the building was constructed in total deviation of the approved plan and called upon them to stop the construction work with immediate effect. The petitioner took up the matter with the third respondent. Since there was a dispute and taking into account the arbitration clause, as contained in the lease agreement, the petitioner filed an application in O.A. No. 737 of 2011 for appointment of an Arbitrator. The parties have unanimously agreed to appoint Mr. Justice A. GopalaRao, former Judge of Andhra Pradesh High Court, as Arbitrator. The Arbitrator passed an award dated 30 March 2013 directing the petitioner to vacate the premises and deliver vacant possession to the third respondent. The Arbitrator observed that the building was not given occupancy certificate by the Local Planning Authority and as such, there is no question of permitting the tenant to continue the restaurant business. The petitioner was directed to deliver possession of the building on or before 30.6.2013 to the third respondent. The petitioner appears to have challenged the award before the Andhra Pradesh High Court.

4. While the matters stood thus, CMDA issued Locking and Sealing and De-occupation notice dated 26.10.2012 indicating the details of violation, and with and a direction to discontinue the usage of the building forthwith to secure compliance with the approved plan within 30 days, failing which, it was indicated that the building would be locked and sealed under the provisions of Section 56 and 57 of the Town and Country Planning Act, 1971. The petitioner appears to have filed an appeal against the said order before the Government invoking Section 80-A of the Town and Country Planning Act, 1971. The petitioner, now seeks a direction to the first respondent to consider and dispose of statutory appeal, on merits.

5. The Chennai Metropolitan Development Authority filed a counter affidavit in answer to the contentions raised in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition. According to CMDA, permission was granted on 15.5.2008 for construction of Stilt floor + 3 floors + 4th floor, with clinic at 1st floor + residential building with 5 dwelling units. However, the third respondent has built a multistoried commercial building comprising basement floor + ground floor + 4 floors in the site at Old D. No. 135, New D. No. 552, T.T.K. Road, Mylapore, Chennai. Since the building was constructed in total violation of the planning permission, further proceedings were taken and ultimately, the impugned notice was issued directing the builder as well as the tenant to discontinue the usage of the building. According to the CMDA, the appeal filed against the impugned notice is not maintainable. CMDA further contended that even the usage was changed from residential to commercial and as such, action was correctly taken against the builder.

6. The third resp