OSR land in approved layouts for public parks cannot be sold privately; title disputes resolved in civil court, not writ jurisdiction.

JUDGMENT :

S.M.Subramaniam J.

The lis on hand has been instituted challenging the order of the District Collector, Chennai District, dated 25.03.2024, holding that the subject property in the writ petition is allotted for developing a public park in an approved lay out. Thus, the District Collector held that the writ petitioners are not entitled to possess the land based on the sale deed, which was executed without any authority under law.

2. The issues emanated from and out of the complaint raised by Anjugamnagar Residents Welfare Association, in a lay out formed at Anjugam Nagar, Jafferkhanpet, Chennai. Since the complaint was not taken on file, a writ petition in W.P.No.29153 of 2019 came to be instituted by the Residents Welfare Association and the Division Bench of this Court passed final order on 13.04.2023, directing the District Collector to issue notice to all the parties concerned, verify the documents, plan approval, title deeds etc., submitted by the parties and take all necessary action for removal of encroachments, if any, after providing sufficient opportunity to all the parties concerned. The said exercise is directed to be completed within a period of eight weeks .

3. In pursuance to the above order of the Division Bench of this Court, the District Collector, undertook the process of enquiry, by issuing notice to all the parties. The petitioners participated in the process of enquiry and submitted their written submissions as well as their documents for consideration. Final order was passed holding that Plot Nos.5, 6 & 7 purchased by the petitioners are earmarked for developing a park in an approved lay out and therefore, they are not entitled for the relief.

4. Mr.V.Raghavachari, learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners would mainly contend that the District Collector found that no documents are available including the approved lay out. There is no details regarding allotment of Plot Nos.5, 6 & 7 as Open Space Reserve area nor park and in the absence of any documents, the decision of the Collector is perverse and to be set aside. He drew the attention of this Court with reference to the sale deed executed between the petitioners and their vendors as well as the documents relating to property tax assessment issued by corporation, building plan permission, patta, etc. Relying on all those documents, the learned Senior Counsel would urge this Court by stating that there is no materials available on record to establish that the portion of the land was allotted for developing a park in the lay out and even the approved lay out plan was not available with the Collector and for all these reasons, the writ petition is to be allowed.

5. The learned Additional Government Pleader would oppose by stating that the District Collector has considered the grounds raised by the petitioners before this Court. The residents association also submitted their explanations stating that the lay out was initially not approved and subsequently, the residents made a request to the developer that they are unable to secure bank loan and subsequently, an application was submitted seeking lay out plan approval which was granted on 12.06.2023 by the competent authority under the Tamilnadu Town and Country Planning Act. Even in the approved lay out, the said portion of land i.e., Plot Nos.5, 6 & 7 are ear-marked as park. However, relying on Plot No.4, the petitioners would claim their portion of the plot is not falling under the park area. Thus, all further actions are to be dropped.

6. Mr.T.Mohan, learned Senior Couns