Respondents must comply with layout approval conditions, including executing gift deeds for public areas, or face cancellation of approval.

O R D E R

Heard Ms.R.Poornima for the petitioner, Mr.N.Naveen Kumar for the first, second and fourth respondents, Dr.T.Seenivasan for the third respondent, Mr.K.S.Saravanan for the fifth respondent and Mr.G.Pugazhenthi for the sixth respondent.

2. The petitioner and the respondents 5 and 6 are adjacent land owners.

The petitioner owns property situated in Jayankonda Cholapuram Vilage at the following survey Nos:-

“ 81/7A, 80/10A2, 81/4B, 81/5B, 81/5C, 80/9, 81/6B, 81/6C, 80/1H, 81/6A & 81/7B”

The respondents 5 and 6 are owners of the property situated in Survey Nos.

81/16, 77/7 and 82/2 of the very same village.

3. Aridasan, the predecessor in title of the respondent Nos. 5 and 6, promoted a layout for the aforesaid properties. The layout was an unapproved one. He handed over certain roads to the Local Body. This was done as early as 2004. Subsequently, taking advantage of the regularization scheme brought about by the Government, Aridasan and respondent No. 5 and the husband of the respondent No.6, applied for and obtained DTCP approval in Approval No.

15 of 2019.

4. One of the conditions for granting approval was that two roads would have to be formed and gifted to the Local Body. In addition, it also called upon the three applicants to execute gift deeds for the park and other areas set apart for common usage. These gift deeds were amongst the conditions for regularizing their unapproved layout.

5. The petitioner claims that though the respondents obtained the approval six years ago, till date, the gift deeds for the roads and park have not been executed. Hence, she moved the respondents by way of a representation calling upon them to ensure that the gift deeds for properties, which have to be gifted as per the layout approval, are executed. The second respondent passed an order on 03.09.2024, directing the Commissioner, Jayankondam Municipality, Ariyalur District, to ensure that the road and other areas are gifted to the local body. Despite this order having been passed, at least 1 ½ years ago, as nothing had progressed, the petitioner is before this Court.

6. The petitioner states that on account of the non-execution of the gift deed, the petitioner is not in a position to have access to her property and thereby develop her property also.

7. Mr.K.S.Saravanan and Mr.G.Pugazhenthi urged that a gift deed has been executed as early as 2004 itself, by Aridasan and hence, there is no necessity for any further gift deeds. In any event, they pointed out the petitioner, being a neighbor, has no locus standi to maintain this writ petition for the relief sought for. The second respondent stands by the letter that was written by him on 03.09.2024.

8. Insofar as the petitioner is concerned, if the roads are gifted, then she would be in a position to develop her own property. In addition to that, statutorily in terms of Section 49 of the Town and Country Planning Act, the Director of Town and Country Planning or his subordinates are entitled to pass an order directing a person, who seeks development of his or her land, to set apart certain portions of the land for public purposes. This is the because under Section 49(2)(c), the planning authority at the time of granting permission for any development has to keep in mind the future development and maintenance of the planning area. The area in concern is Cholapuram village of Jayankondam Taluk. In his wisdom, the second respondent at the time of granting approval to the layout had exercised his power and had approved a plan, which contains two additional roads, a park and other common areas. In order to ensure that the land owners do not claim any exclusive right over the