Back
2018 Supreme(Mad) 2144
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
M.VENUGOPAL, S.RAMATHILAGAM, JJ.
M.Selvaganapathi - Petitioner
Vs
The District Collector, Cuddalore District, Cuddalore - Respondent
W.P.No.15935 of 2013 and M.P.No.1 of 2013
Decided On : 09-08-2018
For the Petitioner: Mr. G.Sankaran
For the Respondent: Mr. J.Pothiraj Special Government Pleader, Mr. Mohammed Fiyaz Ali, Mr. M.Varunkumar, Mr. P.Sanjai Gandhi, Mr. V.Balamurugane
Compliance with building rules and regulations, obtaining necessary licenses and approvals, and establishing structures in accordance with statutory requirements are crucial in determining the legality of constructions.
Headnote:
Petrol Bunk - Unauthorised Construction - Tamil Nadu Panchayat Building Rules, 1997, Section 13 of the Tamil Nadu Fire Service Rules, 1990, Petroleum Act, 1934, Petroleum Rules, 2002 - The court discussed the provisions of the Tamil Nadu Panchayat Building Rules, 1997, Section 13 of the Tamil Nadu Fire Service Rules, 1990, Petroleum Act, 1934, and Petroleum Rules, 2002. It emphasized the requirement of obtaining plan approval and building permission for construction, the conditions for granting a license for storing and selling petroleum products, and the issuance of a No Objection Certificate by the District Collector.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner filed a Writ Petition as a Public Interest Litigation seeking legal action against the unauthorised construction of a petrol bunk by the 10th respondent. The petitioner argued that the construction violated the Tamil Nadu Panchayat Building Rules, 1997.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the 10th respondent had obtained necessary licenses and approvals for the construction of the petrol bunk, including a license under Form 14 of the Petroleum Rules, 2002, and a No Objection Certificate from the District Collector. The court concluded that the Writ Petition was filed in a vexatious and frivolous manner and dismissed it.
Issues: The issues involved the legality of the construction of the petrol bunk, compliance with building rules and regulations, and the validity of the licenses and approvals obtained by the 10th respondent.
Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was based on the finding that the 10th respondent had complied with the necessary rules and regulations, obtained required licenses and approvals, and established the petrol bunk in accordance with statutory approvals.
Final Decision: The Writ Petition was dismissed as the court found it to be vexatious and frivolous, and concluded that the petrol bunk had been established with prior statutory approvals.
M.VENUGOPAL, J.
Heard the Learned Counsel for the Petitioner; Mr. J.Pothiraj, Learned Special Government Pleader for the Respondents 1 to 6; Mr. Mohammed Fiyaz Ali, Learned Counsel for the 7th Respondent; Mr. M.Varunkumar, Learned Counsel for the 8th Respondent; Mr. P.Sanjai Kumar, Learned Counsel for the 9th Respondent and Mr. V.Balamurugane, Learned Counsel for the 10th Respondent.
2. Counter of Respondents 6 & 7 is filed. No counter is filed on behalf of the Respondents 8 to 10.
3. According to the Petitioner, he has filed the present Writ Petition under the caption 'Public Interest Litigation' praying for passing of an order by this Court in directing the Respondents 1 to 9 to take proper legal action against the unauthorised construction of petrol bunk put up by the 10th Respondent at the Main Road, Subramaniyapuram, Thondamanatham Village, Cuddalore Taluk and District, within the time frame to be determined by this Court.
4. In the Writ Affidavit, the Petitioner has averred that in terms of the ingredients of Tamil Nadu Panchayat Building Rules, 1997, there cannot be any construction of building without obtaining plan approval and building permission from the Executive Authority of the Village Panchayat. Further, in the event of any unauthorised construction carried out within the Village Panchayat, Rule 34 of the Tamil Nadu Panchayat Building Rules enjoins the Executive Authority of the Panchayat to take appropriate legal action against such unauthorised construction, by issuing the Provisional Order for demolition or alteration of unauthorised construction and to issue an official confirmation order under Sub Clause (iii), if the owner fails to comply with the show cause notice.
5. At this stage, the Learned Counsel for the Petitioner submits that the 10th Respondent is granted with retail sale of petrol dealership by the 7th Respondent/Indian Oil Corporation, based on which, the 10th Respondent has proceeded to construct petrol bunk on the western side of Cuddalore to Virudhachalam Main Road, at Subramaniyapuram within the limits of Thondamanatham Village Panchayat, amidst the cluster of residential huts. As a matter of fact, the residential houses are actually thatched sheds, located within 60 feets from the petrol bunk. Moreover, it is thickly populated area wherein the villagers, who are working as daily wage earners, are residing in the huts. Also, there is a Church and Kali Temple located nearby.
6. The prime plea taken on behalf of the Petitioner is that the 10th Respondent has proceeded to construct a petrol bunk by deepening the earth for tank purpose by constructing building on the surface without obtaining any approval or permission from the Executive Authority of the Village Panchayat/9th Respondent. In reality, the construction of petrol bunk is carried out only after availing building permission and approval from the Executive Authority inconformity with the Approved Plan without any deviation. However, in the present case, the construction has been made in utter violation of the provisions of the Act and Building Rules without obtaining any permission or Plan approval from the Executive Authority of the Village Panchayat.
7. It is the stand of the Petitioner that it is incumbent on the authorities concerned to take appropriate legal action against the unauthorised petrol bunk put up by the 10th Respondent. Since the 9th Respondent/President, Thondamanatham Village Panchayat, Kurinjipettai Block, Cuddalore District has failed to take any further action against the 10th Respondent for the unauthorised construction of the petrol bunk, the Petitioner is perforced to project the present Writ Petition.
8. In response, the Learned Special Government Pleader for the 6th Respondent contends that the 10th Respondent had applied for an installation of petrol bunk through the Indian Oil Corporation for the grant of license for storing and selling of Petroleum Products in the name and style of Indian Oil Corporation L
