Planning authorities cannot mandate a Gift Deed for land not formally acquired for road widening; due process under land acquisition laws must be followed.

ORDER

Writ petition is filed for a writ of mandamus, directing the respondents 1 to 3, to consider the petitioner's application for planning permission dated 21.03.2025, and to issue planning permission for the petitioner's premises without insisting on execution of a registered Gift Deed for street alignment in favour of the competent authority.

2.The petitioner along with his wife and mother, purchased the property at No.22[11], Medavakkam Tank Road, Ayanavaram, Chennai, measuring an extent of 1104 sq.ft., under a registered Sale Deed dated 07.11.2024. Due to the dilapidated condition of the existing building, the petitioner and his mother applied to the 1^st respondent for permission for demolition of the existing building and for construction of a commercial-cum-residential building. The petitioner submitted the online application on 21.03.2025, along with the requisite fee and the site plan, leaving an extent of 4.00 M x 15.00 M [60 sq.ft.] for road widening. On 27.03.2025, the 2^nd respondent issued an online letter directing the petitioner to produce a Gift Deed for the street alignment portion in favour of the competent authority. The petitioner states that on 20.05.2025, he submitted a reply offering to submit an undertaking, in terms of this Court's order in similar cases. However, the respondents did not respond to the petitioner's representation and therefore, the petitioner filed the above writ petition for the aforesaid relief.

3.The respondents filed a detailed counter stating inter alia that whenever development [layout or building] was intended, planning permission was mandatory for such development. The respondents stated that whenever a development fell on a street alignment or road widening as provided in the Master plan, it was mandatory to leave the portion of the land falling under the proposed alignment or road widening. The developer concerned was also required to register a Gift Deed in favour of the Local Body/CMDA for the portion reserved for street alignment or road widening. The respondents further relied on Section 35-A of the Tamil Nadu Town and Country Planning Act , 1971, and the procedure provided therein in support of their aforesaid submissions.

4.The respondents filed an additional counter affidavit and submitted that, as per the Second Master Plan for the Chennai Metropolitan Area prepared by the Chennai Metropolitan Development Authority, the street alignment of Medavakkam Tank Road, Ayanavaram was fixed at 24m. The respondents therefore submitted that the planning permission of the petitioner would be processed only after the execution of the Gift Deed by the petitioner to the extent of land required for road widening, I.e, 60 mts. The respondents therefore prayed that the writ petition lacked merit and same deserved to be dismissed.

5.The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the insistence on the execution of the Gift Deed for the street alignment portion, in favour of the competent authority, was unlawful, illegal and unjustified, in view of the fact that the competent authority neither notified nor acquired the petitioner's land for road widening purposes. The learned counsel further submitted that the competent authority had not initiated any action in pursuance to the proposal for road widening of Medavakkam Tank Road, Ayanavaram. The learned counsel further submitted that, as a matter of abundant caution, the petitioner had left the area falling under the proposed land alignment, free of development, so as to surrender the same for road widening purposes as and when it was acquired, however, subject to reasonable com