Regional Deputy Director, Director of Town & Country Planning vs L&T Arun Excello Realty Pvt. Ltd. , rep by its Managing Director, P. Suresh

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2015 Supreme(Mad) 1450

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
SATISH K. AGNIHOTRI & M. VENUGOPAL, JJ.
The Regional Deputy Director, Director of Town & Country Planning & Others - Appellants
Versus
L&T Arun Excello Realty Pvt. Ltd., rep by its Managing Director, P. Suresh & Another - Respondents
W.A.No. 1632 of 2014 & M.P.Nos. 1 & 2 of 2014
Decided On: 26-03-2015

Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellants:AL. Somayaji, Advocate General assisted by P.S. Sivashanmugasundaram, Spl. G.P.
For the Respondents: R1, P.S. Raman, SC for Dr. P. Vasudevan, Caveator.

Headnote:
Town and Country Planning Rules, 2008 - Purpose of calculation of charges – Claim of compensation - Validity of said document - Regional Deputy Director - First appellant sent a recommendation to second appellant for approval - Second appellant Director of Town and Country Planning, communication granted approval for construction of Block A - Stilt plus Ground Floor plus three floors total blocks and Block B - Stilt plus Ground Floor plus three floors total eight blocks totaling apartments with certain conditions for an area – Thereafter vide order Deputy Director Town and Country Planning conveyed approval to Executive Officer Municipality advising local body to confirm compliance to approved building drawing and compliance of other conditions as stated in said communication without any infrastructure and amenity charges – Subsequently vide Housing and Urban Development Department Government decided to impose infrastructure and basic amenity charges at different rates on different types of buildings - It was reiterated by Housing and Urban Development Department granting three installments for payment of charges - Tamil Nadu Town and Country Planning Rules, 2008 were framed incorporating rates as under and also payment in installments – Held, Court are unable to countenance contention of appellants that the said memo is not available on file and as such is not a genuine one - As a sequel Court hold that petitioner is entitled to exemption from payment of charges for area which was approved without charges prior - Issue as to whether petitioner is liable to pay FSI charges at rate under Housing and Urban Development Department or at rate as per Rules, 2008 on area after excluding area for which approval was granted prior has become academic - Single Judge has rightly not adverted to said issue in view of petitioners subsequent representation submitting revised proposal for approval for area which is lower than exempted area – Thus Court leave question open to be decided in an appropriate case - Pending writ petition petitioner has submitted a revised proposal for approval for lesser area than exempted area vide letter which reads as under - Court are submitting our revised proposal for MSB Residential Building along with Multi Level Car Park - Court wish to bring to your kind attention that vide letter issued by Commissioner of Town and Country Planning Court are exempt from paying infrastructure and amenities charges for an area as Court have already obtained planning permission for said area prior - Since area now requested in revised proposal for approval which is lower than exempted area Court request you to kindly consider our application and accord planning permission on an early date and oblige - Court would like to bring to your kind attention that project is being executed by us by availing construction finance from financial institutions and Court are incurring heavy interest charges - Also a number of financial institutions have advanced loan through various customer who have booked their apartments in project to us - Hence any delay in approval process may have serious financial impact which Court request you to consider - Writ appeal stands dismissed

Judgment :-

Satish K. Agnihotri, J.

1. The instant intra-court appeal arises from the order dated 15.4.2013 passed in W.P.No.6725 of 2011.

2. The genesis of the case to filing of the instant writ petition is that the first respondent / writ petitioner (for short “the petitioner”) is engaged in the business of property development and connected activities. The petitioner made an application dated 10.8.2006 to the first appellant for grant of approval for construction of residential apartment consisting of several blocks in S.No.25/2D (part) etc. situated in Potheri Village, Chengalpattu Taluk, Kanchipuram District.

3. The Regional Deputy Director - the first appellant sent a recommendation to the second appellant for approval. The second appellant, i.e., the Director of Town and Country Planning, vide communication dated 26.3.2007, granted approval for the construction of Block A - Stilt (Vehicle parking place) plus Ground Floor plus three floors, total 60 blocks and Block B - Stilt (vehicle parking place) plus Ground Floor plus three floors, total eight blocks, totalling 1,568 apartments in S.No.25/2 etc. in Vallancheri Village, Chengalpat Taluk, Kanchipuram District, with certain conditions for an area of 1,83,720 sq. mtrs. Thereafter, vide order dated 28.3.2007, the Deputy Director, Town and Country Planning, conveyed the approval dated 26.3.2007 to the Executive Officer, Maraimalai Nagar, Municipality, advising the local body to confirm compliance to approved building drawing and compliance of other conditions as stated in the said communication, without any infrastructure and amenity charges.

4. Subsequently, vide G.O.Ms.No.191, Housing and Urban Development Department dated 1.6.2007, the Government decided to impose infrastructure and basic amenity charges (for short “the charges”) at different rates on different types of buildings. It was reiterated by G.O.Ms.No.4, Housing and Urban Development Department dated 4.1.2008 granting three instalments for payment of the charges. The Tamil Nadu Town and Country Planning (Levy of Infrastructure and Amenities Charges) Rules, 2008, (for short “the Rules, 2008”) were framed incorporating the rates as under and also the payment in instalments :

Sl.No.	Type of building	Minimum rates per square metre Rs.	Maximum rates per square metre Rs.
1	Multistoreyed buildings accommodating residential or commercial or Information Technology or industrial or institutional or combination of of such activities	500	1,000
2	Commercial building, Information Technology building, Group development and Special building (not covered under Sl.No.1)	250	500
3	Institutional building (not covered under Sl. No.1)	100	200
4	Industrial building (not covered under Sl. No.1)	150	300

5. Subsequently, by G.O.Ms.No.161, Housing and Urban Development Department dated 09.09.2009, on consideration of the representation made by the Confederation of Real Estate Developers' Associations of India, the charges for different categories in different areas were reduced as under :

Sl.No.	Type of Building	Chennai Metropolitan Development Authority	Commissioner of Town and Country Planning
		Chennai Metropolitan Area	Chengalpattu Region	Coimbatore, Tirupur and Kurichi	Other areas
1.	Multi Storeyed Building commercial or Information Technology or Industrial of Institutional or Combination of such activities.	500	500	375	250
2	Multi Stroeyed residential	250	250	250	250
3	Other than Multi Storeyed BuildingCommercial building, Information Technology building, Group Development and Special Building.	250	250	190	125
4	Institutional building (not covered under S.No.1)	100	100	75	50
5	Industrial building (not covered under S.No.1)	150	150	112.50	75

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

Judicial Analysis

SupremeToday