2024:MHC:2546 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 27.06.2024 CORAM :

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM AND THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN W.A.Nos.1007 & 1026 of 2021 and CMP.Nos.6356 & 6425 of 2021 The Commissioner, Udhagamandalam Municipality, Udhagamandalam, Nilgiris District. ... Appellant in both W.A's Vs.

Jansi Kishore ... 1st respondent in W.A.No.1007 of 2021 M/s.Mistair Realty's Private Limited, Represented by its Director, P.Kishore Having registered Office at Door No.4, Shalomn Apartments, No.1, Josier Street, Nungambakkam, Chennai - 600 034. ... 1st respondent in W.A.No.1026 of 2021 District Collector, Udhagamandalam.

The Secretary, Housing and Urban Development Department, Fort St.George, Chennai.

[R2 & R3 suo motu impleaded vide court order dated 07.07.2021 in W.A.Nos.1007 & 1026 of 2021 by MMSJ & RNMJ]

The Secretary to Government, Municipal Administration and Water Supply Department, Fort St.George, Chennai - 600 009. ... Respondents 2 to 4 in both W.A's [R4 suo motu impleaded vide court order dated 17.08.2021 in W.A.Nos.1007 & 1026 of 2021 by MMSJ & RNMJ]

Common prayer:Writ Appeals filed under Clause 15 of Letters Patent to set aside the order dated 30.11.2020 passed in W.P.Nos.13777 & 13874 of 2020 respectively.

For Appellant : Mr.P.S.Raman Advocate General assisted by Mr.P.Srinivas [in both W.A's]

For R1 : Mr.T.Mohan Senior Counsel for Mr.S.Ashok Kumar [in both W.A's]

For R2 to R4 : Mr.T.Chandrasekaran [in both W.A's]

C O M M ON J U D G M E N T

(Common judgment of the Court was made by S.M.SUBRAMANIAM, J.

Application submitted by the 1st respondent seeking extension of time, to commence the building construction, as per the Building Plan Permission granted was under challenge in the writ proceedings.

2. The writ court allowed the writ petition, which came to be challenged by way of intra-court appeal by the Commissioner, Udhagamandalam Municipality.

3. There is no serious dispute on facts. The 1st respondent submitted application seeking Building Plan Permission, which was originally granted in the year 2007 and 2014 respectively. Admittedly, the 1st respondent had not commenced building construction and consequently the Building Plan Approval lapsed. Subsequently, application seeking extension of time to commence the construction based on the original Building Plan Approval was sought for and rejected by the appellant in the year 2019. The said order came to be challenged in the writ proceedings.

4. Mr.P.S.Raman, learned Advocate General assisted by Mr.P.Srinivas, appearing behalf of the appellant in both the writ appeals would submit that under Section 204 of the Tamil Nadu District Municipalities Act, 1920 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), if the construction or reconstruction of any building is not completed within a period specified, permission shall lapse, a fresh application shall be made before the work is continued. Therefore, for all purposes, the Building Plan Permission granted to the respondents in the year 2007 and 2014 become lapsed and there is no provision for granting extension of time to commence the construction based on the original Building Plan Permission granted in the year 2007 and 2014.

5. The learned Advocate General would further submit that Chapter-X-A was inserted by the Tamil Nadu District Municipalities Amendment Act, 1992 with effect from 09.12.1992. Chapter-X-A would apply only to hill stations. Section 217-F denotes period of license Accordingly, every license granted under [Section 217-D or 217-DD] shall be valid for a period of one year from the date on which it is granted and if the construction or reconstruction of a building or the user of agricultural land for non-agricultural purposes, or the engineering, mining or other allied operation for which the license is granted, is not commenced within the said period, it shall not be commenced thereafter unless [the State Government or the Executive Authority as the case may be], on application made ther