Back
Orders Demolition of Church on Land, Remands OSR Issue
Justice M. Dhandapani of the delivered a significant ruling on , ordering the to demolish a church illegally constructed on land earmarked as a in a housing layout. The Court also directed the vacating of a hotel operating on the same premises and remanded the issue of whether the land constitutes for a .
Demolition Ordered Within Two Weeks
The Court directed the Commissioner of the to demolish the church, which had been put up by the on land specifically reserved as a in the VGP Golden Beach Layout at Injambakkam. The demolition must be completed within two weeks of receiving the order copy. Additionally, the was instructed to issue notice to the hotel “Vasantha Bhavan” operating on the land, requiring it to vacate within four weeks.
Land Use Cannot Be Changed, Rules High Court
The dispute centered on approximately 15 grounds and 1,625 square feet of land in Survey No. 15/1C, part of a layout approved in by the . The alleged that VGP Housing was commercially exploiting the as a marriage hall and later attempted to convert it into a restaurant and showroom. The Association sought action from municipal authorities, but the passed an order in holding that the land belonged to the .
Relying on the Division Bench judgment in , the High Court categorically held that land earmarked for a in an approved layout cannot be diverted for any other purpose. “The lands, which have been earmarked for a particular in a layout, which has been approved by the Town Planning Authority, cannot be converted/used for any other purposes, even be it another ,” the Court observed.
The Court noted that even if the District Collector had granted permission for the church, such permission would be impermissible. “The cannot change the purpose from that of a to any other purpose and, therefore, putting up of a hotel and a church in the land earmarked for is against the approval granted by the Town Planning Authority.”
OSR Determination Remanded
While upholding the principle that earmarked land cannot be diverted, the Court found that the had erred by determining ownership without first deciding whether the land qualified as Open Space Reserve. Without examining this foundational question, the Commissioner could not conclude that VGP Housing retained title.
The Court set aside the impugned order and remanded the matter to the for fresh consideration. The authority must hear all parties, consider the relevant Government Orders on OSR, and issue a within twelve weeks.
Until the , the Court ordered that the land be used exclusively as a . The must maintain the building for use by the general public, with priority given to residents of the layout. All rental proceeds shall be deposited in a separate account and disbursed based on the final decision.
The judgment reinforces the principle that common amenities in approved layouts must be protected from by promoters, providing clarity on the interplay between layout approvals and OSR regulations.
