Citation : 2022 Latest Caselaw 11347 Mad
Judgement Date : 28 June, 2022
W.A.No.1416 of 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 28.06.2022
CORAM :
THE HON'BLE MR.MUNISHWAR NATH BHANDARI, CHIEF JUSTICE
AND
THE HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE N.MALA
W.A.No.1416 of 2022
The Commissioner,
Dharapuram Municipality,
No.207-A, Park Road,
Dharapuram 688 656
Tiruppur District ... Appellant
vs
N.Santhanakumar ... Respondent
Prayer: Appeal filed against the order dated 11.11.2021 in WP
No.23752 of 2021.
For the Appellant : Mr.P.Srinivas
For the Respondent : Mr.V.B.R.Menon
JUDGMENT
(Judgment of the Court was delivered by the Hon'ble Chief Justice)
The writ appeal has been filed questioning the judgment of
learned Single Bench dated 11.11.2021 in WP No.23572 of 2021.
___________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.A.No.1416 of 2022
2. The matter pertains to approval of the building plan. The
building plan was approved earlier in the year 2000, having a period
of operation of three years. The said period expired in the year
2003. No construction was undertaken by the petitioner/non-
appellant during the said period of three years. Thereafter, he made
an application for renewal of the building plan. In the intervening
period, there was a change of rules. The municipality concerned had
not entertained the renewal application, rather, the petitioner/non-
appellant was asked to make a fresh application in accordance with
the existing rules. The learned Single Judge interfered in the
decision of the municipality and directed them to consider the
renewal application to be a fresh application made by the petitioner/
non-appellant and proceed accordingly.
3. To avoid delay in getting permission for building, the
learned counsel for the non-appellant prayed that liberty may be
given to him to make a fresh application for approval of the building
plan instead of pressing on the renewal application to treat it to be
fresh application. If fresh application is preferred, the municipality
may be directed to consider it within a reasonable time. The
___________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.A.No.1416 of 2022
proposal of the learned counsel for the non-appellant is not opposed
by the counsel for the municipality. As otherwise, it was his case
that there cannot be a renewal application but a fresh application in
consonance with the rules applicable now.
4. Accordingly, this appeal is disposed of after causing
interference to the order of the learned Single Judge with liberty to
the petitioner/non-appellant to make a fresh application for
approval of the building plan. The said application would be
maintained as per the rules now existing. In case any application is
made, the municipality is directed to consider it expeditiously and in
any case not beyond a period of four months from the date of
receipt of a copy of this order. There will be no order as to costs.
(M.N.B., CJ.) (N.M., J.)
28.06.2022
Index : Yes/No
tar
___________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.A.No.1416 of 2022
M.N.Bhandari, CJ.
and N.Mala, J.
(tar)
W.A.No.1416 of 2022
28.06.2022
___________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Publish Your Article
Campus Ambassador
Media Partner
Campus Buzz
LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026
LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!