Back
2018 Supreme(Mad) 1931
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
M. VENUGOPAL, S.RAMATHILAGAM, JJ.
P.Narayanaswami - Petitioner
Versus
Municipal Administration and Water Supply Department, rep. by the Principal Secretary and Others - Respondent
W.P.No.7721 of 2018
Decided on : 05-09-2018
Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioner: Mr.N.Sivakumar
For the Respondents:Mrs.M.Lalitha, Government Advocate, Mr.P.Srinivas
The central legal point established in the judgment is the authority of the District Collector to investigate and take necessary steps to remove unauthorized encroachments on public park land.
Headnote:
Encroachment - Park - Tamil Nadu Town and Country Planning Act, 1971, Section 17(2)(b) - The court discussed the classification of the land as a 'Park' under the Tamil Nadu Town and Country Planning Act, 1971, and the encroachment of the park by the 4th Respondent. The court directed the District Collector to look into the representations of the Petitioner and to take necessary steps to remove the encroachment if found unauthorized.
Fact of the Case:
The Petitioner filed a Writ Petition seeking the removal of encroachments and restoration of a park in Pammal, which was allegedly encroached upon by the 4th Respondent for commercial purposes.
Finding of the Court:
The court directed the District Collector to investigate the matter and take necessary steps to remove the encroachment if found unauthorized.
Issues: Encroachment of the park, classification of the land as a 'Park' under the Tamil Nadu Town and Country Planning Act, 1971.
Ratio Decidendi: The court directed the District Collector to look into the representations of the Petitioner and to take necessary steps to remove the encroachment if found unauthorized.
Final Decision: The Writ Petition stands disposed of with the direction to the District Collector to investigate the matter and take necessary steps to remove the encroachment if found unauthorized.
M. VENUGOPAL, J.
1. The Petitioner has preferred the present Writ Petition praying for passing of an order by this Court, directing the Respondents 1 to 3 to remove the encroachment and restore the Park in between Ponni Nagar 1st Street and 2nd Street (Survey No.107/3 of LBDM/DDTP No.188/73), Pammal, within a stipulated time.
2. Heard the Learned counsel for the Petitioner, the Learned Government Advocate appearing for Respondents 1 and 3 and the Learned Standing Counsel appearing for the 2nd Respondent. To avoid avoidable delay, notice to the 4th Respondent is dispensed with. No counter is filed on behalf of Respondents 1 and 3.
3. According to the Petitioner, he has served as an Assistant in the State Bank of India Co-operative Society in Chennai and now, he is a Pensioner. Further, he is the General Secretary of Pammal Tax Payers' Association (which is registered under the Societies Act, bearing Registration No.296/2004) and other social Organizations performing various social activities for the benefit of the general public. He is a resident of Pammal area, Eswaran Nagar, which is a part of Ponni Nagar 1st Street and Ponni Nagar 2nd Street.
4. The version of the Petitioner is that there is a 'Park' in between Ponni Nagar 1st Street and 2nd Street in Survey No.107/3 and DTCP Plan Approval Number LBDM/DDTP No.188/73, and that the said Park was used by the local residents as a 'Park', since the year 1973. It is represented on behalf of the Petitioner that the land in question was a 'Park land', according to DTCP Plan Approval No. LBDM/DDTP No.188/73, and it is classified as 'Park' as per Section 17(2)(b) of the Tamil Nadu Town and Country Planning Act, 1971, which is a designated open space and now, the same is encroached by the 4th Respondent for the past two years. Furthermore, during the years 2004 and 2006, the said Park was encroached upon and later, the said encroachments were removed after complaints were made to the 1st Respondent/Principal Secretary, Municipal Administration and Water Supply Department, Secretariat, Chennai. Since then, the Park was used for the children and local residents for recreational purposes.
5. At this stage, the Learned Counsel for the Petitioner submits that from the year 2015, slowly with the influence of local politicians and Officials, the 4th Respondent had encroached upon the land and now put up a permanent compound wall around it and using it for catering purpose in a commercial nature. In fact, the Petitioner made numerous representations to the local authority and the Respondents 1, 2 and 3 on 06.09.2017 and 10.01.2018 to remove the encroachments in question and restore the same. Till date, there is no positive response from the concerned Officials. Hence, the Petitioner has filed the present Writ Petition praying for passing of an order by this Court in directing the Respondents 1 to 3 to remove the encroachments and restore the Park in between Ponni Nagar 1st Street and 2nd Street (Survey No.107/3 of LBDM/DDTP No.188/73), Pammal within a stipulated time to be determined by this Court.
6. In response, the Learned Standing Counsel for the 2nd Respondent contends that based on the request of the Petitioner and also after the receipt of notice in the Writ Petition, the 2nd Respondent had requested the Surveyor of Pammal Sub-Division to survey the lands in S.No.107/3 and sought a Report from him. Indeed, the Surveyor was requested to measure the lands and also report in regard to the entries in the Revenue Records in respect of the land in S.No.107/3.
7. The Learned Standing Counsel for the 2nd Respondent brings it to the notice of this Court that after survey of the lands, the Tahsildar, Pallavaram, through Letter dated 25.07.2018, had stated that the Surveyor had given a Statement on 24.07.2018 that the land as per the Sketch furnished by the Petitioner is a Ryot Punjai land and Patta for the same is registered in the name of Durgasalam and 5 others, as Patta land.
8. In this connect
