SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2020 Supreme(Mad) 507

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
G.R. Swaminathan, J.
Y. Anthoniyammal and Others – Petitioners
Versus
The Director, Town and Country Planning, Chennai & Another – Respondents
W.P.(MD)No. 7209 of 2020
Decided On : 08-07-2020

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioner:R. Karunanidhi, Advocate.
For the Respondent:M. Rajarajan, Government Advocate.

The central legal point established is the application of Section 38 of the Tamil Nadu Town and Country Planning Act, 1971, in deeming the land released from reservation and designation if acquisition proceedings are not taken within three years.

Headnote:

Mandamus - Land Release - The court granted a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to release the petitioners' land as it had lapsed under Section 38 of the Tamil Nadu Town and Country Planning Act, 1971.

Fact of the Case:

The petitioner claimed ownership of land earmarked for park and road purposes. The gazette notification for acquisition was published, but no acquisition proceedings were taken within three years, leading to the land being deemed released.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the case fell under the statutory mandate of Section 38 of the Tamil Nadu Town and Country Planning Act, 1971, and granted the relief sought for by the petitioner.

Issues: Ownership of earmarked land, application of Section 38 of the Tamil Nadu Town and Country Planning Act, 1971, and the release of land from reservation and designation.

Ratio Decidendi: The court applied the statutory mandate under Section 38 of the Tamil Nadu Town and Country Planning Act, 1971, and granted the relief sought for by the petitioner.

Final Decision: The court directed the respondents to issue appropriate proceedings to release the land in question, and the Writ Petition was allowed with no costs.

JUDGMENT :

(Prayer: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents 1 and 2 to release the petitioners' land with an extent of 22208.5 Sq.Feet in Survey Numbers : 67/4A2, 4A3 and 4A4 earmarked for the Nangikottai Detailed Development Plan No.1 of Thanjavur Local Planning area as lapsed under Section 38 of the Tamil Nadu Town and Country Planning Act, 1971.)

Heard the learned counsel on either side.

2. The petitioner claims to be the owner of the petition mentioned property. It was earmarked in Nangikottai Detailed Development Plan No.1, Thanjavur Local Planning area, for the purpose of park and road.

3. The gazette notification was published on 13.04.2005. As rightly pointed out by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner within three years from the date of publication, acquisition proceedings must be taken. If such acquisition proceedings are not taken, the land is said to be deemed to have been released.

4. The petitioner's counsel draws my attention to Section 38 of the Tamil Nadu Town and Country Planning Act, 1971 and it reads as follows:-

    38. Release of land “If within three years from the date of publication of the notice in the Tamil Nadu Government Gazette under Section 26 or Section 27.

(a) No declaration as provided in Sub-Section (2) of Section 37 is published in respect of any land reserved, allotted or designated for any purpose specified in a regional plan, master plan, detailed development plan or new town development plan covered by such notice; or

(b) Such land is not acquired by agreement, such land shall be deemed to be released from such reservation, allotment or designation”

5. The case on hand is covered by a catena of decisions of this Court. Therefore, applying the statutory mandate under Section 38 of the Tamil Nadu Town and Country Planning Act, 1971, I have to necessarily grant the relief sought for. The respondents are directed to issue appropriate proceedings in this regard at the earliest releasing the land in question.

6. With this direction, the Writ Petition stands allowed. No costs.

    Note: 1. Issue order copy within one day after the same received by the Court Officers Section.

2. In view of the present lock down owing to COVID-19 pandemic, a web copy of the order may be utilized for official purposes, but, ensuring that the copy of the order that is presented is the correct copy, shall be the responsibility of the advocate/litigant concerned.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top