Objector aggrieved by unlawful construction lacks locus to challenge revisional order passed in his favor; must seek implementation instead.

For Respondent(s): Mr.K.Karthik Jagannath Government Advocate for R1 to R8 No Appearance for R9 & R10 ORDER (Order of the Court was made by G.ARUL MURUGAN, J.)

Heard.

2. The writ petition has been filed assailing the order of the

2^nd respondent dated 14.11.2025 in No.6353017/UD4(L.Re-2)/2023-4.

3. The petitioner/party-in-person submitted that, the order of the 2^nd respondent is not in accordance with the provisions of the Tamil Nadu Town and Country Planning Act, 1971 [hereinafter referred to as “the Act”] and also further steps have not been taken by the enforcement authorities.

4. The authorities had initiated proceedings under Sections 56 and 57 of the Act, in respect of the Church constructed by the respondents 9 and 10. Notices were issued calling for approved plan and inspection, followed by notice in Form-III to discontinue the usage of the building. The Church had filed statutory revision before the Government under Section 80-A of the Act.

5. Before the revisional authority, the Church had contended that the deviations in construction are minor and negligible, which could be exempted by the Government by invoking powers under Section 113C of the Act and sought for setting aside the notices. The petitioner/party-in-person, was an objector in the revision and he sought for enforcement action to be proceeded with, in respect of the unauthorized construction.

6. The revisional authority/2^nd respondent, by order dated

14.11.2025, rejected the revision preferred by the Church under Section 80A of the Act,. The relevant portion is extracted hereunder:-

“14. After careful examination of the above facts of the case and submissions made, the Government hereby pass order as below:-

(i) Petitioner shall obtain demolition approved plan from the local body showing the rectification if proposed to make the construction as per the rules in force along with the structural stability report to the local body.

(ii) The local body to approve the demolition plan within

10 days from the date of application.

(iii) The petitioner shall carry out rectification as per the approved demolition plan and obtain planning permission satisfying TNCDBR, 2019 within a period of three months and submitting documents/NOC pre-

requisite for issue of Planning Permission.

(iv) Any violation in the conditions will result in further enforcement action by the District Town and Country Planning Office, Kancheepuram District without any notice.

15. The revision petition filed by M/s.Amala Merry Church, represented by its Parish Priest, R.N. Kandigai Village, Uthiramerur Taluk, Kancheepuram District under section 80(A) of the Tamil Nadu Town and Country Planning Act, 1971 is disposed accordingly.”

7. In view of the order passed by the Government by rejecting the statutory revision preferred by the Church under Section 80-A, if at all anyone is aggrieved, it could only be the respondents 9 and 10. However, strangely, the petitioner-in-person who was an objector in the statutory revision, in whose favour the order was ultimately passed, has preferred the present writ petition assailing the order dated 14.11.2025.

8. In spite of our repeated queries, the petitioner-in-person is not able to explain the need or purpose for him to assail the order dated 14.11.2025, which is admittedly in his favour. It is also not made clear as to whether the actual aggrieved party, the Church, whose statutory revision was rejected by the Government, has challenged the order dated 14.11.2025 in any of the proceedings. 9. At the best, when the petitioner can only seek for implementation and consequential action pursuant to the order passed by the revisional authority vide order dated 14.11.2025, the petitioner has chosen to challenge th