IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
M. DHANDAPANI, J.
T.V. Sathyanarayanan – Petitioner
Versus
State of Tamil Nadu, Rep. by the Secretary to Government, Housing and Urban Development Department – Respondent
W.P.Nos.3970 of 2012, 7291 and 7295 of 2021 And M.P.Nos.1 & 2 of 2012 and W.M.P.Nos.7798 & 7799 of 2021
Decided On : 01-06-2026
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. description of the petitioner's development projects and the subsequent administrative dispute regarding infrastructure fees. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8) |
| 2. submission by both parties requesting the court to direct an administrative enquiry into the disputed charges. (Para 9 , 10) |
| 3. direction to the respondent authority to conduct a fair enquiry before finalizing the financial demand. (Para 11 , 12 , 13 , 14) |
COMMON ORDER :
M. DHANDAPANI, J.
W.P.No.3970 of 2012 has been filed seeking issuance of Writ of Declaration declaring that the action of the third respondent in demanding, levying and collecting infrastructure development charges under the Chennai Metropolitan Water Supply and Sewerage Act, 1978 in so far as it relates to the items in Sl.Nos.2, 3, 5 and 8 of the working sheet in respect of the construction of residential-cum- professional office complex in T.S.No.115/7 in Block No.32 and T.S.Nos.23/33, 23/35 and 23/22 in Block No.34 in Tiruvanmiyur Village, Chennai as illegal and unconstitutional.
2. W.P.No.7291 of 2021 has been filed seeking issuance of Writ of Mandamus forbearing the fourth respondent, their officers, employees, subordinates or any other persons claiming or acting under the fourth respondent from demanding, levying and collecting infrastructure development charges for the said area under the Chennai Metropolitan Water Supply and Sewerage Act, 1978 in so far as it relates to the items in Sl.Nos.2 to 15 of the working sheet (Application for Water and Sewer Connection) in respect of the construction of Residential building in R.S.No.43105/5, Block No.96 and R.S.No.4569/34 & 35, Block No.100 of Mylapore Village, bearing Door No.40, South Canal Bank Road, Mylapore, Chennai as illegal and unconstitutional.
3. W.P.No.7295 of 2021 has been filed seeking issuance of Writ of Declaration declaring that the action of the fourth respondent in demanding, levying and collecting infrastructure development charges for the said area under the Chennai Metropolitan Water Supply and Sewerage Act, 1978 in so far as it relates to the items in Sl.Nos.2 to 15 of the working sheet in respect of the construction of Residential building in R.S.No.43105/5, Block No.96 and R.S.No.4569/34 & 35, Block No.100 of Mylapore Village, bearing Door No.40, South Canal Bank Road, Mylapore, Chennai as illegal and unconstitutional.
4. Since the issue involved in these writ petitions are similar in nature, they are heard together and disposed of by way of common order.
5. The learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that the petitioner in W.P.No.3970 of 2012 caused the lands comprised in T.S.No.115/7 in Block No.32 and T.S.Nos.23/33, 23/35 and 23/22 in Block No.34 in Tiruvanmiyur Village, Chennai, to be developed into a residential – cum – professional office complex, for which, the petitioner submitted application for planning permission dated 15.10.2008 for construction of 4 blocks consisting of Floor + Stilt + 4 Floors and 1 Block consisting of Ground Floor + 2 Floors (2nd Floor Part) of residential – cum – professional office with 143 dwelling units and thereafter rectified the defects pointed out by CMDA and addressed a letter dated 03.11.2009 to CMDA enclosing revised plans, pursuant to which, CMDA issued letter dated 16.02.2010, wherein, it was stated that water supply and sewerage infrastructure improvement charge is levied and requested the petitioner to furnish a demand draft in favour of CMWSSB for a sum of Rs.14,84,000/- towards water supply and sewerage infrastructure improvement charges and the petitioner paid the amount on 18.02.2010.
6. The learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioners further submitted that thereafter, CMDA issued planning permission dated 18.03.2010 and the petitioner also obtained necessary building permit dated 28.06.2010 from the Corporation of Chennai. Thereafter, the petitioner approached CMWSSB for the purpose of applying for and obtaining water supply and sewera
The court directed the statutory authority to conduct a formal enquiry and pass reasoned orders regarding disputed infrastructure development charges, ensuring an opportunity of hearing for the petit....
A mandamus issued by the court creates vested rights that restrict the imposition of additional charges for planning permission if initial conditions were met according to earlier mandates.
The court's decision was based on the absence of financial loss to the Government due to the collection of Infrastructure and Amenities Development charges at a lesser amount.
The mere pendency of a civil suit, without an active injunction or stay order from a competent court, does not constitute a valid legal ground for public authorities to withhold consequential adminis....
The government order on reduced infrastructure charges is not retrospective; thus, liabilities incurred before its issuance must adhere to earlier regulations.
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.