IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN, J.
S.Dhanalakshmi - Petitioner
Vs
State of Tamilnadu, rep. by the Secretary to Government, Housing & Urban Development Department, Chief Secretariat, Chennai 600 009 - Respondent
WP.No.13049 of 2008 and MP.Nos.2 & 3 of 2008
Decided On : 23-08-2021
Constitution of India ,1950 - Article 226,14 and 300-A - TNT & CP Act, 1971, - Section 37(2), 33,17,31,21 and (1) - Evidence Act, - Section 58 - Tamilnadu Town Planning Act, 1920 - Section 14 (3) - Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India praying to issue a writ of certiorari calling for records of second respondent relating to order and notification published in T.N.Govt and first respondent order and notification on file of second respondent and quash same – Whether Government can prepare a development plan and deprive owner of land from using that land - Held, Government cannot deprive persons from using their private property - Without acquiring private land Government cannot deprive owner of land from using that land for residential purpose - Further held that if land was not acquired either by agreement or by acquisition they would be deemed to have been released from reservation - Court Case on hand scheme of Periyeri Town Planning was already lapsed and dead and there was no acquisition - Entire scheme itself had lapsed as early - After period of 35 years respondents cannot invoke Section 33 (1) of TNT & CP Act, 1971 and vary such a lapsed and dead scheme - Above judgments cited by learned Senior Counsel appearing for petitioners are squarely applicable to case on hand and impugned proceedings initiated by respondents are liable to be quashed - Writ Petition Allowed.
ORDER :
Prayer :- Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a writ of certiorari calling for the records of the second respondent relating to the order and notification bearing Roc.No.31604/2004 DP-1, dated 12.09.2006 published in the T.N.Govt Gazettee No.38 dated 27.09.2006, and first respondent order and notification bearing Roc.No.14607/2007/DP-1 dated 31.03.2008 on the file of the second respondent and quash the same.
This Writ Petition is filed to issue a writ of certiorari calling for the records of the second respondent relating to the order and notification bearing Roc.No.31604/2004 DP-1, dated 12.09.2006 published in the T.N.Govt Gazettee No.38 dated 27.09.2006, and order and notification bearing Roc.No.14607/2007/DP-1 dated 31.03.2008 on the file of the second respondent and quash the same.
2. The case of the petitioner is that Aravankadu area consisting of 164 acres of agricultural lands, is situated adjacent to the Salem Town. The owners of those agricultural lands have converted the same into residential plots by way of layouts and the same was approved by the planning authority. Thereafter, all the plots were sold out to various third persons. The purchasers also constructed houses in their respective plots. Therefore, the entire area already has been developed as residential area in accordance with the provisions contained in Tamilnadu Town and Country Planning Act, 1971 (hereinafter called as TNT & CP Act) and renamed as Sankar Nagar. Therefore, there is absolutely no need or necessity to once again develop such a developed area by way of preparing a development plan either under Tamilnadu Town Planning Act, 1920 or now under the Tamilnadu Town and Country Planning Act, 1971. While being so, the fifth respondent herein prepared a development plan for such developed area in the name of Periyeri Town Planning Scheme by GO.Ms.No.2467, R.D. & L.A. Dept dated 15.12.1969. The first respondent sanctioned the said scheme as contemplated under Section 14 (3) of the Tamilnadu Town Planning Act, 1920 and published the same in the Government Gazette on 21.01.1970.
2.1 In the said scheme, a portion of the road was contemplated admeasuring 1452 sq.ft. owned by one, Periyanna Gounder. After such publication, old act was repealed and new Act has been enacted. The respondents realised that it has been already developed and abandoned the scheme, not proceeded with further, such as acquisition of land, allotted or designated therein and not published the declaration under Section 37(2) of the TNT & CP Act, 1971, within a period of three years from the date of publication. Therefore, all the house sites were released from the scheme, since the scheme itself had lapsed, not in legal existence, non-est and become dead as early as on 20.01.1973. As such, all the owners are entitled to develop and use their respective house sites according to their convenience. Accordingly, the said Periyanna Gounder was entitled to deal with his house site bearing TS.No.4/2A2, since it was also released from the scheme. Hence, he sold out the said house site in favour of one K.P.Ramasamy and others by the sale deed dated 25.04.1984. In turn, they sold out the same in favour of one, Periyannan by another sale deed. The said Periyannan had sold the house site to one, Balakrishnan. The petitioner with bonafide intention, purchased the house site admeasuring 1452 sq.ft from the said Balakrishnan by registered sale deed dated 25.09.2006 for valuable sale consideration. Thereafter, after obtaining the building plan from the fifth respondent and constructed house with one borewell. The said house was also assessed to the property tax and also obtained electricity service connection and the petitioner is living there.
2.2 While being so, the third respondent has ignored the above facts, position of law and procedures, and made a proposal for variation of the lapsed and dead Periyeri Town Planning Scheme in the name of
Asha Vs. PT.B.D.Sharma University of Health Sciences and Others reported in (2012) 7 SCC 389
Raju S.Jethmalani & Ors Vs. State of Maharashtra and Ors reported in (2005) 11 SCC 222
Pillaiyar P.K.V.K.N.Trust Vs. Karpaga N.N.U.S and Ors reported in (2010) 9 SCC 344
K.S.Kamakshi Chetty & Others Vs. Commissioner reported in (2008) 2 MLJ 184
Casa Granade Private Ltd Vs. Chennai Metropolitan Development Authority reported in (2007) 3 MLJ 647
V.Nagamani & Another Vs. The Director of Town Country Planning
Kunwar Pal Singh Vs. State of UP and others reported in (2007) 5 SCC 85
State of Orissa & another Vs. Mamata Mohanty reported in (2011) 3 SCC 436
Raju S.Jethmalani & Ors Vs. State of Maharashtra and Ors reported in (2005) 11 SCC 222
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.