The court upheld the planning authority's decision, confirming that once land is designated as a park, it cannot be converted to a road, ensuring compliance with the Tamil Nadu Town and Country Planning Act.

ORDER :

This writ petition has been filed in the nature of a Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records of an order dated 23.06.2023 passed by the 2^nd respondent, the Joint Director, Town and Country Planning Department, Ariyalur in Roc.No.416 of 2023 and also of the consequential proceedings dated 06.07.2023 passed by the 3^rd respondent, the President, Kilapalur Panchayat, Ariyalur District in Na.Ka.No.1/2023-2024 relating to layout No.DTCP No.10 of 2023 in Kilapalur Village, Thirumanur Panchayat Union, Ariyalur Taluk and to quash both the aforementioned orders and direct the respondents to revise the layout No.10 of 2023 in such a way that there is connectivity between the roads in existing layout No.08 of 2022 and the layout of 10 of 2023.

2. In the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition, the petitioner had stated that she is the absolute owner of the property at S.No.477/3C and 458/2 in Kilapalur Village, Kilapalur Panchayat Union, Ariyalur District, totally measuring 4.75 acres. The petitioner had developed the same as a layout of house sites called Sri Lakshmi Kuberan Nagar, Kilapalur. She applied to the 2^nd respondent, the Joint Director, Town and Country Planning Department, Ariyalur District, for approval of the layout. The 2^nd respondent also granted layout approval in DTCP Approval No.08/2022 by proceedings dated 18.08.2022. The 3^rd respondent, President, Kilapalur Panchayat, Ariyalur District also granted approval by proceedings dated 25.08.2022. The petitioner had also applied for registration under the provisions of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016 and registration was also granted by the Tamil Nadu Real Estate Regulatory Authority by proceedings dated 28.10.2022. The petitioner claims that she had developed the layout after providing sufficient space for park, road and other public utility services. She also executed a Gift Deed in favour of the 3^rd respondent, President, Kilapalur Panchayat for such public spaces.

3. It had been further stated in the affidavit that 5^th, 6^th and 7^th respondents are the owners of property in S.No.474/4, 474/5, 475/2 and 475/4 in Kilapalur Village. The 5^th to 7^th respondents also intended to develop the aforementioned lands totally measuring 6.96 acres into house sites and had applied for approval from the 2^nd respondent. It had been stated that the 5^th to 7^th respondents had shown the western bit of the property as a park. It is contended that the said park comes in between the layout of the petitioner in DTCP Approval No.8/2022 and the proposed layout of the 5^th to 7^th respondents. It had been further stated that the 2^nd respondent had granted approval of the proposal given by the 5^th to 7^th respondents in DTCP Approval No.10/2023 by proceedings dated 23.06.2023 and the 3^rd respondent also granted consequential approval for the same. It had been contended that the eastern end of the layout developed by the petitioner ends in a road called Shanthi Salai. It had been contended that when the 5^th to 7^th respondents had provided a plan to their layout, they should have ensured that Shanthi Salai, which is an existing road is connected outward. However, they had earmarked that particular place for a park and therefore, Shanthi Salai had come to dead end. Contending that grant of approval to the 5^th to 7^th respondents would prevent free movement from one layout of house sites and another layout of house sites and to reach Ariyalur and Thanjavur Road, the Writ Petition has been filed seeking interference of the grant of approval for the layout proposed by the 5^th to 7^th respondents.

4. It had been contended that the 2nd respondent should have taken into consideration Rule 47 of the Combined Development Rules, which provided that there should be free circulation or rather movement from one layout to another layout by connecting roads. It had been contended that grant of approval for laying a park at the end of Shanthi Salai would prevent the free movement