IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
S.M. SUBRAMANIAM, K. SURENDER, JJ.
S.P. Thiyagarajan – Appellant
Versus
The Commissioner, Coimbatore City Municipal Corporation – Respondent
W.A. No. 2551 of 2023
Decided On : 10-03-2026
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. land earmarked for public use cannot be converted (Para 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7) |
| 2. validity of empowered committee's decision questioned (Para 8 , 10 , 11) |
| 3. legal precedent against conversion of public purpose land (Para 12 , 13 , 14 , 15) |
| 4. locus standi for residents upheld in public interest (Para 17 , 18 , 19 , 20) |
| 5. empowered committee's resolution set aside, remanded for fresh decision (Para 21 , 22) |
JUDGMENT :
S.M. SUBRAMANIAM, J.
1. Under assail is the writ order dated 12.04.2022 passed in W.P.No.43824 of 2016.
2. The writ appellant has instituted the writ proceedings challenging the Resolution passed by the Empowered Committee in 33rd Empowered Committee meeting held on 30.08.2016 in Agenda No.26 and to direct the Commissioner, Coimbatore City Municipal Corporation to resume the land earmarked for park and playground in Nethaji Nagar Layout from the 6th respondent as per the eviction notice dated 10.03.1015.
3. The facts in brief would show that the 6th respondent Mr. Sachithananda Nageswaran purchased the subject land which is earmarked for park and playground in the year 1993 from the developer of an approved layout. It is not in dispute that as per the approved layout, the subject land has been earmarked for developing park and play ground by Coimbatore City Municipal Corporation. The said purchase of land was made for developing Home for aged people. However, the 6th respondent constructed a school and running the same for the past about 16 years. The appellant who is residing in the nearby location made a complaint stating that the park and playground area earmarked under the approved layout has been sold illegally and the 6th respondent has constructed a school building contrary to the layout approval as well as the provision of the Town and Country Planning Act. The complaint given by the appellant was considered by the District Collector and the certificate dated 04.04.2013 issued by the District Collector would read as follows:-
CERTIFICATE
The Siddar Gnana Padasal functioning in Coimbatore South Circle, Sundakkamuthur Vilalge, Siddar Gnana Peedam, Vivakudil, Kovaipudur has purchased the below mentioned Punjai land situated at Sundakkamuthur Village, Kovaipudur South circle, Coimbatore District. Serial Ka.Sa.No Extent in Sub Registrar of Madukkarai /

Through the Coimbatore, Kuniyamuthur town Panchayat File No.19813/88---Ma.Va.U.E.No.155/88 eh land purchased has been approved for development as a Layout. Among this 14418 Square feet (the 14418 square feet mentioned in the above mentioned Sl,No.1 to 4) this land has been allotted for Park and Playground.
4. Further representations submitted by the 6th respondent before the Member Secretary, Commissioner Local Planning Authority was considered and the Member Secretary has communicated a reply dated 02.08.2013, wherein he has reiterated that the proposed place has been earmarked for park and playground with Layout plan KA/T CP.No.155/88. It is not permissible to construct a school in the place reserved for park and playground. The said intimation resulted in approaching the Assistant Commissioner, South Zone, Coimbatore Corporation by the 6th respondent who in turn in his reply dated 28.01.2014 again reiterated that the subject school building built, operational and located at Coimbatore Municipality South Zone Kovaipudur, Sundakkamudur Village Survey No.117/2, 117 approved is meant for park and play area.
5. The Member Secretary, Coimbatore Town Planning Authority addressed a letter to the Commissioner, Town Planning Department on 22.12.2014, wherein, he made a finding that the physical inspection of the subject land has been made. The subject land earmarked as park and playground for the benefit of the public has been purchased and school building has been constructed and was functioning. He has reiterated that the application submitted regarding conversion of the park and playground earmarked for public usage is impermissible and consequential enforceme


The conversion of land designated for public purposes, such as parks or playgrounds, to private use is impermissible under the Town and Country Planning Act, emphasizing the local authority's duty to....
Modification of land reserved for public purposes requires valid legal processes, including notification and consultation with affected parties, as determined by relevant sections of the Town Plannin....
Point of law : Section 46 of Act, it is the duty of the Gram Panchayat to provide certain amenities to the public and maintain them, such as construction of schools (clause iii), laying and maintenan....
The judgment establishes the principle that reserved open spaces in layouts cannot be used for any other purpose, emphasizing the public trust doctrine, the importance of preserving open spaces, and ....
Review jurisdiction is limited to correcting apparent errors and cannot serve as an appeal; land reserved for public purposes under the prior act remains non-alienable unless specific actions under t....
Areas reserved as open spaces, parks, or playgrounds in a sanctioned layout cannot be repurposed for commercial or other uses, as they are held in trust for the public and are essential for environme....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.