ORDER

(Order of the Court was made by S.S.SUNDAR, J.)

The petitioner has filed the Writ Petition as the President of Adhiyanoothu Panchayat Union for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, directing the 2nd respondent to initiate necessary proceedings to restore the public park situated in S.Nos.817/B, 817/2A at Adiyanoothu Panchayat, Dindigul East Taluk, Dindigul District, encroached by the 4th and 5th respondents by converting the same into Housing Plots for sale.

2. Heard Mr.S.Sarvagan Prabhu, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr.M.Lingadurai, learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the respondents 1 to 3 and Mr.S.V.Durai Solai Malai, learned counsel appearing for the respondents 4 & 5.

3. It is the case of the petitioner that he is the elected President of the Adhiyanoothu Panchayat Union. The respondents appear to have promoted a layout in S.No.817/B and 817/2A, measuring an extent of 2.71 Acres at Adiyanoothu Panchayat, Dindigul East Taluk, Dindigul District. It is also admitted that the layout was approved by the competent authorities. An extent of 11987 square feet of land was reserved in the said layout as a public park, at the time when approval was obtained by the respondents 4 and 5. Even though the reserved plots are used as a park by the residents of the layout for a long time, it is the case of the petitioner that the respondents 4 and 5 are trying to convert the area allotted for park into housing plots to further make money.

4. It is brought to the notice of this Court that by proceedings dated 06.04.2018, the President of Adiyanoothu Panchayat has considered the application filed by the promoters to permit them to convert the land used from park to residential. This application was allowed by the President of the Panchayat and permitted 6 number of plots to be used as residential houses by conversion of the land use. Followed by the proceedings of President of Panchayat dated 06.04.2015, the Block Development Officer by proceedings dated 15.02.2018, has passed an order in the following lines:-

“nkw;go tpz;zg;gjhhpd; ntz;Lnfhis Vw;Wk;> jsh;j;jpa kidg;gphpt[ tiugl mq;fPfhukhdJ 1994-k; tUlj;jpa jkpH;ehL Cuhl;rpfs; kidg;gphpt[ tiuglr; rl;lj;jpw;Fk; mjd; cg tpjpfSf;Fk; fl;Lg;gl;L FoapUg;ghf bray;gl ntz;Lk; vd;w epge;jid tud;Kiwapd;go> ghh;it(2)y; fz;Ls;s kidg;gphpt[ tiugl mq;fPfhuj;jpy; bghJ cgnahfj;jpw;bfd xJf;fpa ,lj;jij ghh;it (3) y; fhZk; jpUj;jpa kidg;gphpt[ tiuglj;jpy; fhl;lg;gl;Ls;sgo> moaD}j;J fpuhkk; rh;nt 817/B, 817/2A Mfpa g[y vz;fSf;F fl;Lg;gl;l 13A> 13B> 13C> 26A> 26B> kw;Wk; 26C ,yf;fkpl;l kidfis FoapUg;ghf cgnahfk; bra;Jbfhs;st[k;> Mtzg;gjpt[ nkw;bfhs;s vt;tpj Ml;nrgiza[k; ,y;iy vd;W ,jd;K:yk; cj;jputplg;gLfpwJ.”

5. It is to be noted that the respondents 4 and 5 have sold the property to several persons showing the common area as a park. Despite reserving a substantial portion of the layout for the purpose of park and the residents have purchased the plots with the understanding that the park will be kept as such, the promoters, namely, respondents 4 and 5 for the purpose of selling the plots used as park as house site has gone for conversion and the President of the Panchayat and the Block Development Officer have also held at rest.

6. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in PT. Chet Ram Vashist v.

Municipal Corporation of Delhi reported in (1995) 1 SCC 47 and Division Bench of this Court in T.M.Rajasekaran v. State of T.N. reported in 2007-3- LW 995 and in T.G.Naveen v. The Chairman, TNEB reported in 2021 (5) CTC 648 held that the land reserved for a public purpose in a layout is meant for the beneficial use of the residents / plot owners. Even the promoter / developer seeks to be the owner of the plots, as he holds it only to the benefit of plot owners.

7. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in PT. Chet Ram Vashist v.

Municipal Corporation of Delhi reported in (1995) 1 SCC 47, in paragraph No.6 held as follows:-

“6. Reserving any site for any street, open space, park, school etc. in a layout plan is normally a public purpos