SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 20483

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
N.SATHISH KUMAR, M.JOTHIRAMAN, JJ
G.Tamil Selvi – Appellant
Versus
The State of Tamil Nadu – Respondent
W.P.(MD)Nos.19103 to 19105 of 2021



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Mr.T.Lajapathi Roy, Senior Counsel (In all W.Ps) for M/s.Roy & Roy Associates
For the Respondents:Mr.P.T.Thiraviam, Govt. Advocate for R1 to R4, Mr.S.P.Maharajan, Spl. Govt. Pleader for R5, Mr.J.John for R6

Cancellation of building permits requires legal foundation; opinions without basis lead to quashing of decisions.

Headnote:The petitioners challenged orders dated 30.09.2021 cancelling building permits on grounds of non-application of mind by the authorities. Despite prior grant of permits, the cancellation arose from instructions of the Government Pleader, which the Court found unsustainable. The petitioners’ violations were addressed, thus nullifying grounds for cancellation. The Court emphasized that opinions without legal basis cannot lead to permit cancellations. Results in the impugned orders being quashed and the petitions allowed.

Table of Content
1. cancellation of permits for deviations noted. (Para 2)
2. arguments regarding the authority's discretion. (Para 3 , 4)
3. court review and assessment of permit issuance. (Para 7)
4. basis for quashing the impugned orders. (Para 8)

(Order of the Court was made by N.SATHISH KUMAR, J.)

These Writ Petitions are filed challenging the impugned orders dated 30.09.2021, passed by the 5th respondent, cancelling the building permits granted to the petitioners under Building Permit Nos. 88/2020-2021, 187/2020-2021 and 186/2020-2021, based on the instructions of the Government Pleader.

2. The brief facts leading to the filing of these Writ Petitions are as follows:

The Writ Petitioners have constructed a building in Survey No.

34/1C1, Thirupuvanam, Sivagangai District, after obtaining the necessary building plan approval from the local authority. However, the 6th respondent has filed a Writ Petition before this Court in W.P.(MD)No. 18069 of 2016, for removal of the unauthorised construction in S.No. 34/1C1. The said Writ Petition was disposed of by this Court on 08.08.2017, directing the Executive Officer, Tiruppuvanam Panchayat, Tiruppuvanam, to initiate action in accordance with law for the demolition of the unauthorised construction said to have been put up by the petitioners herein.

2.1. Pursuant to the said order, it was found that the petitioner in W.P.(MD) No.19103 of 2021 had constructed a building deviating from the original plan, with a deviation to the extent of 18.08 sq. ft. on the ground floor and the same extent on the first floor. Similarly, the petitioner in W.P.(MD)No.19104 of 2021, had constructed a building deviating from the original plan, with a deviation to the extent of 182.79 sq.ft and the petitioner in W.P.(MD)No.19105 of 2021, had constructed a building deviating from the original plan, with a deviation to the extent of 18.08 sq.ft on the ground floor and the same extent on the fist floor. Therefore, the Executive Officer, Tiruppuvanam Panchayat, Tiruppuvanam, issued notices dated 29.11.2019 directing the petitioners to remove the unauthorised construction put up by them to the above extent. Challenging the said notices, the petitioners have filed Writ petitions in W.P.(MD)Nos.26690, 26692 & 26693 of 2019 and also sought for a direction to dispose of the retention applications filed by them under Section 49 of the Town and Country Planning Act, 1971.

2.2. A co-ordinate Bench of this Court, by common order dated

13.12.2019, directed the authorities to consider the retention applications filed by the petitioners. Pursuant to the said directions, the Additional Chief Secretary to Government, Municipal Administration and Water Supply Department in its order dated 11.12.2020, has held that the retention applications are not maintainable in Government level and they have to be filed before the competent authority viz., the Executive Officer of Thirupuvanam Town Panchayat and therefore, directed that necessary planning permission may be obtained from the concerned authority by filing Retention Applications in this regard. Pursuant to the said order dated 11.12.2020, the Writ Petitioners have filed retention applications before the Executive Officer, Thirupuvanam Town Panchayat and he has granted building permission vide its order dated 22.03.2021. Later, the 6th respondent has filed a contempt petition in Cont.P.(MD)No.1048 of 2021. Thereafter, the impugned orders came to be passed by the 5th respondent on 30.09.2021 cancelling the Building permits granted to the petitioners on 22.03.2021. Challenging the said orders, these Writ Petitions have been filed.

3. The learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioners would submit that though the 5th respondent had initially granted the building permits, merely on the basis of the contempt petition filed by the 6th respondent, the impugned orders have been passed without application of mind, cancelling the said permits. He would further submit that once the building

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top