The right of access, even without ownership, is sufficient for the regularisation of unapproved layouts under relevant rules.

COMMON ORDER

WP(MD).No.25812 of 2025 has been filed by the layout promoter challenging the order of the Director of Town and Country Planning dated 03.09.2025 wherein the layout approval already granted in favour of the petitioner company on 27.12.2017 has been cancelled.

2.W.P(MD).No.30373 of 2025 has been filed by four plot owners challenging the above said order and the the consequential order of the Assistant Director of Town and Country Planning, Madurai dated 11.09.2025 wherein he had communicated the order of the Director dated 03.09.2025.

(A).Facts leading to the filing of the present writ petitions are as follows:

3.The petitioner company had initially created an unapproved layout under the name and style of “Classic City” and constructed 134 houses and handed over the same to the purchasers. The Government of Tamil Nadu introduced Tamil Nadu Regularisation of Unapproved Layouts and Plots Rules, 2017 (hereinafter called as 'Rules') with effect from 04.05.2017. In order to get regularisation of the unapproved layouts, the petitioner company had made an application to the Director of Town and Country Planning and the same was granted on 27.12.2017. A consequential technical approval was granted by the Assistant Director on 18.01.2018.

4.The fourth respondent in WP(MD).No.25812 of 2025 and fifth respondent in WP(MD).No.30373 of 2025 namely Mrs.I.Bhavani claimed title over a portion of the land in the unapproved layout by virtue of a gift settlement deed in her favour dated 24.08.2017. She had filed WP(MD).No. 15943 of 2021 seeking a mandamus directing the official to cancel the layout approval granted in favour of the petitioner company. The said writ petition was disposed of on 27.09.2023 directing the petitioner therein to file an appeal before the Director of Town and Country Planning within a period of four weeks and Director was directed to dispose of the same within a period of 12 weeks. In compliance with the order of the Court, the first respondent has passed the impugned proceedings on 03.09.2025 cancelling the approval granted to the layout and a consequential order has been passed by the second respondent on 11.09.2025 intimating the same to the writ petitioner. These orders are put to challenge in the present writ petitions.

(B).Reasons assigned in the impugned orders for cancellation of the layout approval are as follows:

5(a).Though there is a registered pathway agreement in favour of the petitioner company, the same has been gifted in favour of Mrs.I.Bhavani under a settlement deed dated 24.08.2017. Therefore, the survey number in dispute, namely 18/3A2 does not belong to the petitioner company which is included in the layout plan.

b)Survey Nos.13/3 and 14/12 in Achampathu Village and Survey No.103/1 in Kochadai Village belongs to Sri Lala Sri Rengachatram as per order of the District Munsif Court in O.S.No.109 of 2016. These survey numbers are also forming part of the layout approval.

c)The Deputy Block Development Officer has pointed out that the lands that are earmarked for the road in the layout approval have not been handed over to the local body by executing a gift deed and therefore, the same is not reflected in the Road Register of Thiruparankundram Panchayat Union.

d)The layout promoter Mr.P.Jeyakumar own