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) 22346

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR
Kandasamy – Appellant
Versus
The Director – Respondent



##PAGE1##

W.P.(MD)No.346 of 2026

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

DATED: 05.03.2026

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR

W.P.(MD)No.346 of 2026

Kandasamy ... Petitioner

vs.

1.The Director

Directorate of Town and Country Planning

2nd, 3rd and 4th floor

C and E Market Road

Koyembedu

Chennai 600 107

2.The Member Secretary

Thanjavur Local Planning Authority

No 5 Ganapathi nagar 2nd street

Medical college Road

Thanjavur 613 007 ... Respondents

PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of

India for issuance of Writ of Mandamus, directing the Respondents

No. 1 and 2 to release the petitioner's land with an extent of 24.7

cents in Survey Number 188/1A situated in Miruthiyanja Padaiveedu

Village, Palavathankattalai, Kumbakonam Taluk, Thanjavur District

treating the Palavanthankattalai Detailed Development Plan 4 as

lapsed under Section 38 of the Tamil Nadu Town and Country

Planning Act, 1971.

For Petitioner :Mr.R.Karunanidhi

1/7

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 11/03/2026 06:02:40 pm )

##PAGE2##

W.P.(MD)No.346 of 2026

For Respondents :Mr.P.Subbaraj

Special Government Pleader

ORDER

This Writ Petition has been filed seeking a direction to the

respondents 1 and 2 to release the petitioner’s land measuring an

extent of 24.7 cents in Survey No.188/1A, situated at Miruthiyanja

Padaiveedu Village, Palavanthankattalai, Kumbakonam Taluk,

Thanjavur District, by treating the Palavanthankattalai Detailed

Development Plan No.4 as lapsed under Section 38 of the Tamil Nadu

Town and Country Planning Act, 1971.

2. The contention of the petitioner is that though the petitioner’s

land was included in Palavanthankattalai Detailed Development Plan

No.4, the property has not been acquired till date and continues to

remain in the possession and enjoyment of the petitioner. It is further

contended that as per Section 38 of the Tamil Nadu Town and

Country Planning Act, 1971, if the land reserved under a Detailed

Development Plan is not acquired within a period of three years from

the date of publication of the plan, such land shall be deemed to have

been released from the reservation. According to the petitioner, no

acquisition proceedings have been initiated within the prescribed

2/7

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 11/03/2026 06:02:40 pm )

##PAGE3##

W.P.(MD)No.346 of 2026

period of three years and therefore the reservation under the Detailed

Development Plan has lapsed.

3. I have considered the rival submissions and perused the

materials available on record.

4. This Court is of the view that it is not necessary to dwell upon

the entire factual matrix of the case, since with regard to the very

same Detailed Development Scheme, a Division Bench of this Court in

W.A.(MD) No.485 of 2020 has already held that the scheme had

lapsed by virtue of Section 38 of the Tamil Nadu Town and Country

Planning Act. The relevant portion of the judgment reads as follows:

“11. As rightly pointed out by the learned counsel

appearing for the respondents/writ petitioners, the counter

affidavit proceeds on the merits of the claim and in no way

deals with the issue of deemed lapse. In the considered opinion

of this Court, the learned Judge, on correct appreciation of

facts and by applying the legal position as enumerated in the

above said judgment, allowed the writ petition. This Court, on

going through the reasons assigned in the impugned order, is

of the considered view that there is no infirmity or error

apparent on the face of the record for the reasons assigned by

the learned Single Judge for allowing the writ petition and

finds that the writ appeal lacks merits.

3/7

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 11/03/2026 06:02:40 pm )

##PAGE4##

W.P.(MD)No.346 of 2026

12. It is also brought to the notice of this Court that the

writ appeal filed by the official respondents in W.A.(MD) No.

340 of 2020, against the order dated 27.02.2017 in W.P.(MD)

No.14456 of 2014, was also dismissed on 02.03.2020.”

13. This Court has consistently held that if the land has

not been acquired wi

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