AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
G.R.Swaminathan, J
The writ petitioner is a trust. They purchased 1 Acre 9 cents of land in Survey No.243/2E, Kodaikanal in the year 2005. They applied to the local planning authority for planning and building permission. They put up construction thereafter. While so, a notice dated 06.01.2014 was issued by the local planning authority under Sections 56 and 57 of the Tamil Nadu Town and Country Planning Act, 1971. The petitioner offered their explanation. However, a confirmation order came to be passed on 10.03.2014. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner filed a review petition before the Government. Review petition was however dismissed on 15.07.2016. Challenging the same and also the consequential action taken by the local planning authority, this writ petition has been filed.
2.It cannot be in dispute that the following the violations are present.
Sl. No
Land Use
As Per Approved PLAN
As per site
Deviation
% of Violation
1
Prohibited zone
Permission was granted to carry out repair works in the existing ground floor residential building to an areal of 249 Sqm
Commercial Building
GF-855.16 Sqm
FF-731.56 Sqm
Existing residential building was fully demolished and newly commercial building constructed to an area of Ground Floor 855.16 Sqm and First Floor 731.56 Sqm totally 1586.72 Sqm
1.New constructions are not permitted in the prohibited zone.
2.Instead of repair works to the existing residential building the petitioner has constructed a new commercial building it violates master plan regulations and Hill Area Building Rules, 1993.
Therefore, the order passed by the first respondent cannot be faulted. No interference is called for.
3.However, we have to take note of the subsequent developments. A modified master plan has come into existence. We therefore permit the petitioner to submit a fresh application to the authority concerned. It is open to the concerned authority to consider the petitioner's case and proceed strictly in accordance with law. If the petitioner's building can fit in with the new master plan and the planning and building norms, subject to terms that may be imposed by the authorities, the petitioner's building can escape from demolition. If the authorities insist on making structural alterations and changes, the petitioner is bound to make the same. The petitioner cannot flout the planning norms and demand that he should be allowed to keep the building intact. Of-course, the respondents will not demolish the petition mentioned building, till orders are passed on the petitioner's representation. If the petitioner had not already made an application, liberty is given to the petitioner to make a fresh application to the authority concerned within a period of three weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The petitioner's application shall be disposed of on merits and in accordance with law within a period of six months. Till then, the order impugned in the writ petition will be kept in abeyance. If any order is passed on the petitioner's application, the impugned proceedings will certainly abide by the said out come. Of-course, till such orders are passed, the status quo that is prevailing as on date shall continue.
4.The petitioner's building should be in tune and conformity with the planning norms. The authorities cannot pass any stereotyped order. It will vary from case to case. The authorities have to conduct a spot inspection and consider the petitioner's case in the light of the revised master plan. They will have to issue fresh proceeding. The authorities will have to ensure that the petitioner's building is in consonance with every rule and law of the land. There should be periodical inspection. If the authorities fail to ensure conformity of the petitioner's building with the planning norms, the authorities will be liable to be proceeded against.
5.This writ petition stands dismissed. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.