Back
2024 Supreme(Online)(MAD) 15564
HIGH COURT OF MADRAS
Honourable Mr Justice S.S. SUNDAR
TEERANCE RAMYA – Appellant
Versus
THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER – Respondent
Unauthorized constructions can be addressed through regulatory frameworks, allowing for potential regularization under compliance with statutory provisions.
Headnote:
Cantonment - Unauthorized Construction - Cantonment Act - Sections 248(1), 320 - Court emphasized the need for compliance with regulatory measures concerning unauthorized constructions and underlined the necessity for regularization following proper procedures.
Fact of the Case:
The case involves two writ petitions concerning unauthorized construction by a petitioner, prompting a notice for demolition from the Cantonment Board. The petitioner admitted the unauthorized nature of the construction, seeking regularization due to family needs.
Finding of the Court:
The court found the construction was unauthorized but allowed the petitioner to submit a revised building plan for approval by the Cantonment Board, ensuring compliance with regulations and addressing the neighbor's concerns regarding obstruction to drainage.
Issues: Whether the unauthorized construction can be regularized under the provisions of the Cantonment Act and related regulations.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that while the unauthorized construction is acknowledged, there exists a provision for regularization through an approved plan, provided it adheres to permissible limits and regulations.
Final Decision: Both writ petitions were disposed of with directions for the petitioner to submit a revised building plan.
COMMON ORDER
(Order of the Court was made by S.S.SUNDAR, J.)
W.P.No.21288 of 2024 is filed to quash the proceedings of the respondent, The Chief Executive Officer, Cantonment Board, dated 07.04.2022 and the consequential notice dated 12.06.2024 issued under Sections 248(1) and 320 of the Cantonment Act, 2006 .
2. W.P.No.9148 of 2024 is filed to issue writ of mandamus directing the first respondent, Cantonment Board, to consider the representation of the petitioner dated 22.01.2024 to demolish the unauthorised construction of the building constructed by the petitioner in W.P.No.21288 of 2024. The petitioner in W.P.No.9148 of 2024 is the neighbour of the petitioner in W.P.No.21288 of 2024.
3. The letter dated 07.04.2022 issued by the Cantonment Board is a notice under Section 248(1) of the Cantonment Act directing Mrs.Terrance Ramya, the petitioner in W.P.No.21288 of 2024 to stop construction and to demolish the unauthorised portion. By proceedings dated 12.06.2024, the Chief Executive Officer of the Cantonment Board has directed Mrs.Terrance Ramya to remove the unauthorised construction within 30 days in exercise of power under Section 320 of the Cantonment Act, 2006 .
4. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, Mrs.Terrance Ramya, admits that the construction is unauthorised. In all the communications which she has addressed to the Chief Executive Officer of Cantonment Board, she has submitted that she requires additional space due to expansion of her family and therefore, she had no option but to construct the building, which, of course, in violation of the regulations.
5. Though the petitioner prayed for regularisation of the unauthorised portion, the learned counsel appearing for the Cantonment board pointed out that there is no scope for regularisation of the building. The learned counsel would submit that the unauthorised portion can be compounded only upto FSI and the Cantonment Board is not competent to compound the same without the concurrence of the Competent Authority under the Cantonment Act. He further stated that in the event the petitioner file an affidavit to demolish the unauthorised portion beyond the permissible limits, the Cantonment Board will consider.
6. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner in W.P.No.9148 of 2024 has no serious objection for the unauthorised building to be compounded if it is compoundable under the statute.
7. The petitioner, Terrance Ramya, has filed an affidavit of undertaking as required by this Court, on the following lines:
" 3. I most humbly submit that I wish to protect about 500 square feet of construction in the ground floor and about 500 square feet of construction in the first floor from and out of the super-structure that has already been put up by me in my land, subject to the approval of the Cantonment Board. For the said purpose, I undertake to file a revised building plan before the Cantonment Board for its approval.
4. I most humbly pray for my request to be considered sympathetically in view of the fact that I have a large family to accommodate and I have already invested huge sums of money for the construction that has been put up by me exhausting my family's resources and availing bank and other loans. I also respectfully pray for a reasonable amount of time to be given to me for completing the exercise. I undertake to abide by the orders of this Hon'ble Court in this regard."
8. The learned counsel for the Cantonment Board submits that to the extent possible, the construction will be regularised by a decision as approved by the Competent Authority.
9. Mrs.Terrance Ramya, the petitioner in W.P.No.21288 of
2024 is, therefore, directed to submit a fresh building plan as desired by her to retain for approval which can be considered by the respondent Cantonment Board. After considering the scope of compounding, the respondent Board shall consider approving the plan in accordance with the Cantonment Act and Rules. The petitioner, after getting approval, shall dem
