IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 09-12-2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V. LAKSHMINARAYANAN

and MP No. 1 of 2012

M/s Nawab Sikohul Mulk Dilawar Jung Bahudur Wakf, Rep.By Its Power Agent,

P.Dharamchand, S/o.Late Sri.J.D.Pannalal,

No.76, 238, R.K.Mutt Road, Chennai-4.

Petitioner(s)

Vs.

1. The State Of Tamil Nadu

Rep. by The Secretary,

Housing And Urban Development Department,

Fort. St. George, Chennai-9

2.The Member Secretary

Chennai Metropolitan Development Authority,

(CMDA), Chennai-8

Respondent(s)

PRAYER

calling for the records of the 1st respondent dated 10.3.2011 in G.O.(3D) No.16, Housing and Urban Development (UD-V) Department, quash the same and direct the respondents to issue planning permit to the petitioner’s property measuring 90,999 sq.ft in R.S. Nos. 1022/1, 1022/2 and 1022/8 abutting Dr.Natesan Road and Lloyds Road, Chennai-5. Amended as Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records of the 1^st Respondent in Letter No. 17276/UDVI (1) / 2017-7 dt. 30.10.2019 insofar as it requires the Petitioner

to apply a fresh application for reclassifications of his land to CMDA from OSR use Zone to Primary Residential use Zone quash the same and direct the Respondents to issue planning permit to the Petitioner based on the acknowledgement dated 20.07.2007 as per Ref. No. PPA No. BC1/17522 /2007 dated 06.05.2008 to the Petitioner's property measuring 90,999 sq. ft. in R.S. Nos. 1022/1, 1022/2 and 1022/8 abuttting Dr. Natesan Road and Lloyds Road, Chennai-5 without insisting on an application for reclassification.

(PRAYER AMENDED AS PER ORDER dated 17/12/2019 made in WMP.35722/2019 in WP.17104/2012 by AQJ)

For Petitioner(s): Mrs.Hemasampath Senior Counsel for Ms.R.Meenal For Respondent(s): Mr.L.S.M.Hasan Fizal, AGP(R1)

Mrs.P.Veena Suresh (R2)

ORDER

Heard Mrs.Hema Sampath, learned Senior Counsel instructed by Ms.R.Meenal, for the petitioner and Mr.L.S.M.Hasan Fizal for the 1^st respondent and Mrs.P.Veena Suresh for the 2^nd respondent.

2.The petitioner is the owner of 90,999 sq.ft. in R.S. No. 1022/1, 1022/2 and 1022/8 in Krishnampet, Triplicane, Chennai-600 005. The property being a Trust property, the petitioner approached this Court for permission to alienate the same. By an order dated 24.11.1994, this Court granted permission to the petitioner to develop the said property. The area, where the property falls, is a mixed residential zone. Hence, there is no bar for the petitioner to develop the same by constructing 56 dwelling units as proposed.

3.The petitioner filed an application seeking permission from the 2^nd respondent for putting up a construction. This application was made as early as 20.07.2007. The 2^nd respondent replied that the property had been reserved as ‘open space reservation and recreation zone’ in the Detailed Development Plan. The petitioner issued a notice pointing out that the reservation had lost its vitality and called upon the 2^nd respondent to proceed further. The CMDA passed an order on 06.05.2008 rejecting the planning permissions by giving two reasons, viz., (1) the site does not abut a road;

(2) it has been shown as an ‘open space reservation’ and ‘recreation zone’ in the Detailed Development Plan.

4.The petitioner filed a writ petition before this Court in W.P. No. 15939 of 2008. It sought to quash the order dated 06.05.2008. By an order dated 16.06.2008, this Court dismissed the writ petition granting liberty to the petitioner to avail the alternate remedy before the 1^st respondent. It further directed that if an appeal is so filed, it should be disposed off expeditiously and in accordance with law.

5.Within four days of the said order, the petitioner preferred an appeal to the 1^st respondent on 20.06.2008. As the appeal was not disposed of as directed by this Court, the petitioner yet again approached this Court by way of Writ Petition in W.P. No. 7953 of 2010. Taking into consideration that the appeal had been pending for a long time, this Court had directed the appeal to be disposed of within