Madras High Court
Mr.M.Govindan vs R.Gajedran ..1St on 3 February, 2021
Rev.Aplw.No.11/2018 & WP.No.1841/2018
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED 03.02.2021
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.SATHYANARAYANAN
AND
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N.SESHASAYEE
Rev.Aplw.No.11/2018 and WP.No.1841/2018 & WMP.Nos.2291, 2522
and 4942/2018 in WP.No.1841/2018
[Video Conferencing]
Rev.Aplw.No.11/2018
Mr.M.Govindan .. Petitioner
Versus
1.R.Gajedran ..1st respondent/Writ
petitioner
2.The Secretary to Government
of Tamil Nadu,
Municipal Administration &
Water Supply, St. George Fort
Chennai 600 009.
3.The Director,
Directorate of Town Panchayats,
Kuralagam, Chennai 600 108.
4.The Executive Officer
Gummidipoondi Town Panchayat,
Tiruvallur District. .. RR 2 to 4/RR1 to 3
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Rev.Aplw.No.11/2018 & WP.No.1841/2018
Prayer:- Review Application filed under Order 47 Rule 1 read with
Section 114 of the Code of Civil Procedure to review the order daed
31.10.2017 in WP.No.11628/2017 passed by this Court.
For Petitioner : Mr.Ravikumar
Senior Counsel for
M/s.Paul & Paul
For RR 2 & 3 : Mr.M.Elumalai
Additional Government Pleader
For R4 : Mr.A.N.Thambidurai
Special Government Pleader
WP.No.1841/2018:-
M.G.Vignesh Kumar .. Petitioner
Versus
1.The Director,
Directorate of Town Panchayat,
Kuralagam, Chennai 600 108.
2.The District Collector
Tiruvallur District, Tiruvallur.
3.The Revenue Divisional Officer
Ponneri 601 204, Tiruvallur District.
4.The Tahsildar
Gummidipoondi Taluk
Gummidipoondi Panchayat,
Gummidipoondi 601 201.
5.The Executive Officer,
Gummidipoondi Town Panchayat,
Gummidipoondi 601 201.
6.R.Gajendran .. Respondents
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Rev.Aplw.No.11/2018 & WP.No.1841/2018
***R6 impleaded as per order dated 02.02.2018
made in WMP.No.2849/2018 in WP.No.1841/2018
Prayer:- Writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of
India praying for issuance of a writ of certiorarified mandamus calling
for the records of the 5th respondent culminating in his impugned notice
Na.Ka.No.3 of 2017 dated 25.01.2018 and quash the same and
consequently, direct the respondents herein from in any manner
interfering with the rights of the petitioner in enjoying his property,
situate in survey No.559/B bearing New No.230, Old No.242, GNT
Road, Gummidipoondi Panchayat, Tiruvallur District.
For Petitioner : Mr.A.K.Sriram for
M/s.A.S.Kailasam Associates
For RR 1 to 4 : Mr.M.Elumalai
Additional Government Pleader
COMMON ORDER
[Order of the Court was made by M.SATHYANARAYANAN, J.]
(1)This Court, in continuation and in conjunction with the earlier orders,
especially the last order dated 18.11.2019, is passing the following
order.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Rev.Aplw.No.11/2018 & WP.No.1841/2018
(2)Heard the submissions of Mr.Ravikumar, learned Senior counsel
appearing for the Review Applicant and Mr.A.K.Sriram, learned
counsel for the writ petitioner in WP.No.1841/2018 and also perused
the materials placed before it.
(3)The learned Senior counsel for the Review Applicant as well as the
learned counsel for the writ petitioner in WP.No.1841/2018 has placed
heavy reliance upon the judgment and decree dated 14.12.1970 passed
in OA.No.1/1969 [OS.No.4/1958 on the file of the Court of Sub Judge,
Chengalpet] on the file of the Court of Subordinate Judge at
Kanchipuram and point out that the said suit was filed by
Gummidipoondi Panchayat Union Council represented by the
Councilor against the private parties, contending among other things
that the ''A'' Schedule lands are granted by the Government for
maintenance of the Choultries and the ''B'' Schedule properties belong
to the said Trust and while answering the additional issue, i.e., whether
the suit preferred by the Gummidipoondi Panchayat Union Council is
maintainable, has given a finding that in the light of the decision
rendered in the earlier suits in OS.No.41/1946 and OS.No.33/1951 on
the file of the Sub Court, Chengalpet, the plaintiff-Council was not
appointed as Trustee by the Scheme Court and as such, they cannot
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Rev.Aplw.No.11/2018 & WP.No.1841/2018
maintain the suit. The petitioner in WP.No.11628/2017 has not
brought to the knowledge of this Court the said findings and as such,
the final order passed in WP.NO.11628/2017 is to be reviewed.
(4)Mr.A.K.Sriram, learned counsel appearing for the writ petitioner in
WP.No.1841/2018 would submit that, by placing reliance upon the
very same judgment, the writ petitioner makes a challenge to the
impugned notice of the Local Body dated 25.01.2018 issued under
Sections 56, 57 of the Town and Country Planning Act, 1971.
(5)The Review Applicant, in paragraph No.5 of the Grounds of Review
would aver among other things that Natesa Mudaliyar has executed a
registered Mortgage Deed in favour of one Salammal on 30.07.1941
and after the mortgage period was over, the original owner, viz.,
Chandrasekara Chetty, did not come forward to redeem the mortgage
and therefore, the title to the said property has been perfected by
prescription in favour of Salammal, who is none other than the sister
of M.Munusamy Naidu and since Salammal did not have any child,
she had settled the property in favour of her brother M.Munusamy-
father of the Review Applicant on 23.01.1980 and also executed a Will
dated 23.06.2010 in favour of his daughter Mrs.Usha Rani and his
grandson, viz., Mr.M.G.Vignesh Kumar – petitioner in
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Rev.Aplw.No.11/2018 & WP.No.1841/2018
WP.No.1841/2018 and as such, the said property is in possession and
enjoyment of the petitioner in WP.No.1841/2018 for decades together.
(6) Per contra, Mr.M.Elumalai, learned Additional Government Pleader
appearing for official respondents would submit that in the light of the
fact that the land has been classified as ''Chatram'', it is always open to
the Government to take appropriate action for removal of
encroachments and insofar as the challenge made to the notice issued
under the provisions of the Town and Country Planning Act, 1971, is
concerned, the writ petitioner in WP.No.1841/2018 is not able to
produce any sanctioned plan or permit and since the construction is
wholly an unauthorised one, the law must take its course and as such,
it is not open to the writ petitioner to make any grievance in this regard
and prays for dismissal of WP.No.1841/2018.
(7)This Court paid its anxious consideration to the rival submissions and
also perused the materials placed before it.
(8)The Review Applicant as well as the writ petitioner in
WP.No.1841/2018 placed heavy reliance upon the judgment dated
14.12.1970 made in OS.No.1/1969 on the file of the Court of the
Subordinate Judge at Kanchipuram.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Rev.Aplw.No.11/2018 & WP.No.1841/2018
(9)A perusal of the Schedule of Properties would read among other
things that the land admeasuring to an extent of 4.43 acres in
S.No.559-B of Old Gummidipoondi Village, Ponneri Taluk, Tiruvallur
District, is one of the properties of the Charitable Trust. The father of
the Review Applicant, viz., Thiru M.Munusamy Naidu, has executed a
Will dated 23.06.2010 creating life interest and vested reminder in
favour of his daughter Mrs.Usha Rani – mother of the writ petition in
WP.No.1841/2018 as well as in favour of the petitioner – son of
Mr.M.Govindan, who was a minor at that point of time and another
minor, viz., Tharun @ Dinesh Kumar – son of Mr.M.Varadharajan.
As per the Schedule of property given in the said Will, the landed
property admeasuring to an extent of 4.43 acres in S.No.559-B at
Gummidipoondi Village, has been bequeathed in favour of the said
persons.
(10)In the light of the findings given in the judgment and decree dated
14.12.1970 in OS.No.1/1969 by the Court of Subordinate Judge at
Kanchipuram, the Will executed by the father of the Review Applicant
in favour of Usha Rani and his grandsons, prima facie appears that the
testator may not have any title.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Rev.Aplw.No.11/2018 & WP.No.1841/2018
(11)Now, insofar as WP.No.1841/2018 is concerned, the writ petitioner
appears to have submitted an application seeking permission to put up
a superstructure and it prima facie appears that the superstructure has
been put up without any Planning Permission.
(12)This Court, vide last order dated 18.11.2019, has also observed that
''it prima facie appears that very many unauthorised constructions
came into being despite the dispute pertains to the classification of the
land as to whether it is a patta land or Chatram land?
(13)In the absence of any Planning Permission, it is open to the Local
Body to proceed against the unauthorised construction, despite the
dispute as to whether the land in S.No.559-B belongs to the Trust or
''Chatram Land''?
(14)Mr.A.K.Sriram, learned counsel for the writ petitioner in
WP.No.1841/2018 has drawn the attention of this Court to the
photographs made available at page No.89 of the typed set of
documents and would submit that there are very many structures exist
in the land in S.No.559-B of Gummidipoondi Village and the Local
Body cannot target the superstructure put up by the petitioner alone.
This Court finds force in the said submission.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Rev.Aplw.No.11/2018 & WP.No.1841/2018
(15)Accordingly, the 5th respondent in the writ petition / Local Body, is
directed to cause inspection of the existing superstructures in
S.No.559-B of Gummidipoondi Village, after putting on notice, the
concerned person/s and if the result of the inspection reveals any
unauthorised / deviated construction, immediate and necessary action
shall be taken in accordance with law, by also adhering to the
principles of natural justice. The 5th respondent is directed to file an
Action Taken Report along with supporting documents and
photographs, in the light of the observations made in this order.
(16)In the light of the above facts and circumstances coupled with the
reasons assigned above, the challenge made to the impugned notice
dated 25.01.2018 of the 5th respondent is unsustainable.
(17)Insofar as the Review Application No.11/2018 is concerned, in the
light of the findings given by the Civil Court in OS.No.1/1969,
respondents 2 and 3 in the Review Application are directed to file
their counter affidavits with supporting documents to sustain their
claim that the land in S.NO.559-B of Gummidipoondi Village is a
Chatram land and the Local Body, viz., the 3rd respondent is
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Rev.Aplw.No.11/2018 & WP.No.1841/2018
entitled to take action and also, as to the existence or otherwise of
the Trust.
(18)In the result,
A) WP.No.1841/2018 stands dismissed. No costs. Consequently,
the connected miscellaneous petitions are closed. Post the writ
petition on 21.04.2021 for filing of the Status Report by the 5 th
respondent with supporting documents and photographs.
B) Post the Review Application NO.11/2018 on 21.04.2021.
Counter affidavits of respondents 2 and 3 with supporting
documents.
[MSNJ] [NSSJ]
03.02.2021
AP
Internet:Yes
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Rev.Aplw.No.11/2018 & WP.No.1841/2018
To
1.The Secretary to Government of Tamil Nadu,
Municipal Administration &
Water Supply, St. George Fort
Chennai 600 009.
2.The Director,
Directorate of Town Panchayat,
Kuralagam, Chennai 600 108.
3.The District Collector
Tiruvallur District, Tiruvallur.
4.The Revenue Divisional Officer
Ponneri 601 204, Tiruvallur District.
5.The Tahsildar
Gummidipoondi Taluk
Gummidipoondi Panchayat,
Gummidipoondi 601 201.
6.The Executive Officer,
Gummidipoondi Town Panchayat,
Gummidipoondi 601 201.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Rev.Aplw.No.11/2018 & WP.No.1841/2018
M.SATHYANARAYANAN, J.,
AND
N.SESHASAYEE, J.,
AP
Rev.Aplw.No.11/2018 &
WP.No.1841/2018
03.02.2021
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
