Madras High Court
Vakil Hosur Hills Owners' Association vs The Secretary To Government on 28 October, 2024
Author: G.K.Ilanthiraiyan
Bench: G.K.Ilanthiraiyan
W.P.Nos.7792 of 2017 & 14138 of 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
RESERVED ON : 12.09.2024
PRONOUNCED ON : 28.10.2024
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN
W.P.Nos.7792 of 2017 & 14138 of 2024 and
W.M.P.Nos.8536, 8537, 15325 & 15326 of 2024
W.P.No.7792 of 2017 :-
Vakil Hosur Hills Owners' Association,
Rep. by its President George Koshi,
Villa No.VHHO15, Hosur,
Krishnagiri District. ... Petitioner
-Vs-
1. The Secretary to Government,
Housing and Urban Development Department,
Chief Secretariat,
Fort St. George,
Chennai-600 009
2. The Commissioner,
Town and Country Planning,
No.807, Anna Salai,
Chennai - 600 002.
3. The Member Secretary,
Hosur New Town Development Authority,
Hosur,
Krishnagiri District.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Page 1 of 26
W.P.Nos.7792 of 2017 & 14138 of 2024
4. M/s. Vakil Housing Development Corporation P. Ltd
Registered Office:- 78,
Koramangala Industrial Area,
Jyothinivas College Road,
Koramangala, Bangalore-95.
5. S.Bharathidasan
6. Jayanthi Mani
7. The Sub Registrar,
Hosur. ... Respondents
Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India
praying to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the
proceedings in RC No.15094/2016/LA2 dated 19.10.2016 pending on
file the second respondent consequently order of approval in RC
No.744/2016/OPNVK dated 16.11.2016 passed by the third respondent
and quash the same.
For Petitioner : Mr.V.Subamanian
For Respondents
For R1 to R3, R7 : Mr.V.Manoharan
Additional Government Pleader
For R5 & R6 : Mrs.V.Srimathi
For R4 : Mr.P.Gopiraja
For R3 : Mr.S.Diwakar
W.P.No.14138 of 2024 :-
Vakil Hosur Hills Owners' Association,
Rep. by its President K.Kannan
Villa No.VHH135, Hosur,
Krishnagiri District. ... Petitioner
-Vs-
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Page 2 of 26
W.P.Nos.7792 of 2017 & 14138 of 2024
1. The Secretary to Government,
Housing and Urban Development Department,
Chief Secretariat,
Fort St. George,
Chennai-600 009
2. The Director,
Town and Country Planning,
No.807, Anna Salai,
Chennai - 600 002.
3. The Member Secretary,
Hosur New Town Development Authority,
Hosur,
Krishnagiri District.
4. The Commissioner,
Hosur Municipal Corporation,
Hosur, Krishnagiri District.
5. M/s. Vakil Housing Development Corporation P. Ltd
Rep. by its Managing Director,
Registered Office:- 78,
Koramangala Industrial Area,
Jyothinivas College Road,
Koramangala, Bangalore-95.
6. R.Krishnaswamy ... Respondents
Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India
praying to issue a Writ of Certiorari, calling for the proceedings
pertaining to the planning permission in No.72/2024, Building
permission in No.153/BL/2024/00072 both dated 13.02.2021 on the file
of the fourth respondent and quash the same.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Page 3 of 26
W.P.Nos.7792 of 2017 & 14138 of 2024
For Petitioner : Mr.V.Subamanian
For Respondents
For R1 to R3 : Mr.V.Manoharan
Additional Government Pleader
For R4 : Mr.T.Balaji
For R5 : Mr.P.Gopiraja
For R6 : Mrs.V.Srimathi
COMMON ORDER
The writ petition in W.P.No.7792 of 2017 has been filed
challenging the proceedings in R.C.No.15094/2016/LA2 dated
19.10.2016 on the file of the second respondent and the approval order
dated 16.11.2016 on the file of the third respondent, thereby converted
the subject property into house plot and granted technical approval. The
writ petition in W.P.No.14138 of 2024 has been filed challenging the
order passed by the fourth respondent dated 13.02.2024, thereby granted
planning permission in No.72/24 and building permission in
No.153/BL/2024/00072.
2. The petitioner in both writ petitions are one and the same
and the subject property is also one and the same. Therefore, this Court is
inclined to pass a common order in both writ petitions. The parties are
referred to as per their ranking in W.P.No.14138 of 2024.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.Nos.7792 of 2017 & 14138 of 2024
3. The petitioner association is consisting the member of
owners of their respective villas in the lay out of Vakil Hosur Hills. As
per the lay out, 319 villas and individual houses were proposed to
develop for residential purpose. The lay out was duly approved by the
second respondent by its proceedings in Ma/va/Na.U.E.No.77/2006, on
certain conditions. While granting approval, the area of lands have been
categorized and reserved for specific purpose. Accordingly, the total
extend of the land is 28.38 ares (1234990 sq.ft.); the number of
residential plot is 319; the land ad measuring 131938 sq.ft., is earmarked
for park and 28265 sq.ft., is earmarked for children play area. That apart,
the land ad measuring 26702 sq.ft., is reserved for open space area and
the land ad measuring 382405 sq.ft., is allotted for roads; 14530 sq.ft., of
land is earmarked for three shops and 10424 sq.ft., land is earmarked for
community hall and 16860 sq.ft., land is earmarked for public purpose.
4. After approval as per the lay out plan, the fifth respondent
was not authorized to sell the lands which was specifically reserved for
public purpose. Thus it is clear that the duty cast upon the developer to
create facilities and amenities for the space earmarked for public
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.Nos.7792 of 2017 & 14138 of 2024
purpose. Though in the approval order of the second respondent termed
the land reserved for public purpose is saleable by the developer, it
cannot be sold as the developer stands in the capacity of custodian,
trustee for the residents for the purpose of creating the facilities like
schools, clinic, community hall and to be handed over the same for
maintenance by the petitioner association.
5. Further as per the condition on agreement for sale cum
construction, the developer ought to have completed all the facilities and
amenities including basic amenities and special amenities within 24
months from the date of this agreement, with six months grace period.
Thereafter, the developer ought to have handed over such facilities in
favour of the petitioner association, in order to maintain the same.
Therefore, the fifth respondent cannot claim any right or title over the
land which is specifically earmarked for that purpose.
6. While being so, the fifth respondent attempted to sell the
entire land ad measuring 16860 sq.ft., land which is earmarked for public
purpose to the third parties violating the lay out approval conditions as
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.Nos.7792 of 2017 & 14138 of 2024
well as the sale cum construction agreement. Though the petitioner
raised several objections, the fifth respondent sold out the subject
property on 29.06.2016 vide document No.10274 of 2016 in favour of
one Bharathidasan and Jayanthimani. Thereafter, they applied for
conversion of the land from commercial to residential purpose. Without
hearing the petitioner, the subject property was converted into house
plots and granted permission to develop the same as residential plots.
Therefore, both the orders are challenged in W.P.No.7792 of 2017 and it
is pending with interim order that any registration pertaining to the land
reserved for public purpose would be subject to the result of the writ
petition.
7. While pending the above writ petition, the sixth respondent
in W.P.No.14138 of 2024 purchased the said property from the said
Bharathidasan and Jayanthimani vide sale deed dated 17.03.2017 vide
document No.1996 of 2017. After purchase the sixth respondent had
proposed to construct six apartments stilt with three floors and applied
for planning permission. It was granted by the fourth respondent by the
planning and building permission dated 13.02.2024, though the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.Nos.7792 of 2017 & 14138 of 2024
petitioners made specific objection for granting planning and building
permission in favour of the sixth respondent.
8. Therefore, the petitioner filed a suit in O.S.No.49 of 2024 on
the file of the District Munsif Court, Hosur for permanent injunction as
against the sixth respondent. Subsequent, the petitioner instructed to
withdraw the said suit as it is not maintainable as against the planning
authority and filed the another writ petition in W.P.No.14138 of 2024
9. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted
that when the writ petition is pending in W.P.No.7792 of 2017
challenging the conversion of the land into house plot and granting
technical approval for construction of residential plots, the fourth
respondent ought not to have granted planning and building permission
for the subject property, which was purchased by the sixth respondent.
The subject land is reserved for public purpose as per the lay out and also
the conversion of the land is under challenge before this Court and
therefore, the planning and building permission ought not to have
granted by the fourth respondent.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.Nos.7792 of 2017 & 14138 of 2024
9.1. Further the fourth respondent has no jurisdiction or power to
convert the land from the public purpose to residential purpose and it is
clear violation of Sections 32 & 33 of the Town and Country Planning
Act. As per the conditions imposed in the approved lay out, the common
purpose area ad measuring 16860 sq.ft., is provided for childrens day
care centre and clinic etc., as per the statutory needs. Apart from that
other area is earmarked for park, children play area, community hall etc.
Before conversion of land, the petitioner association was not given
opportunity of hearing as such it is clear violation of principles of natural
justice.
10. The fifth respondent filed counter and the learned counsel
appearing for the fifth respondent submitted that the fifth respondent
owned property comprised in survey No.436, 437/1a, 2a, 444, 446,
675/1, 2, 680 and 683/1,2,3 situated at Choodasandiram Village,
Channathur Taraff, Hosur Taluk, Krishnagiri District, to an extent of
6,65,180 sq.ft. The fifth respondent developed the above said land into
housing plots in the name of “Vakil Hosur Hills” consisting 319 villas in
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.Nos.7792 of 2017 & 14138 of 2024
different dimensions and the same was duly approved by the second
respondent in Na.Ka.No.77/2006 dated 12.05.2006. Thereafter the house
plots were sold out to various third parties. As per lay out the subject
property was earmarked for public purpose such as commercial complex.
Therefore, it was remained with title of the fifth respondent and it is
saleable area and it was sold out in favour of the sixth respondent. Usage
of commercial property is meant for private profit and gain. Therefore,
no public purpose involved in it.
11. The sixth respondent filed counter and the learned counsel
appearing for the sixth respondent submitted that the subject property
was purchased from the fifth respondent for the valid sale consideration
by the sixth respondent vide registered sale deed dated 17.03.2019 vide
document No.1996/2017. Thereafter, the sixth respondent had proposed
to construct six apartments with three floors and applied for planning and
building permission. The said application was duly considered and the
planning and building permission was granted by the fourth respondent.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.Nos.7792 of 2017 & 14138 of 2024
11.1. She further submitted that as per the provisions of Town and
Country Planning Act, 1971, after the lapse of five years, the land
reserved for public purpose is not used then the reservation lapses.
Though the lay out approved in the year 2006, the land which was
originally earmarked for commercial purpose is not used so far, even
after completion of more than fifteen years. Therefore, the fourth
respondent rightly granted building and planning permission to construct
residential apartments. In support of her contention, she relied upon the
judgment dated 21.04.2022 passed in W.P.(MD).No.7607 of 2022 in the
case of Ponnamani Vs. The Director, Town and Country Planning and
ors., in which this Court held that in accordance with the provisions of
Section 38 of the Tamil Nadu Town and Country Planning Act, 1971, no
steps have been taken for acquiring the lands for formation of road
within the period of five years from the detailed development plan.
Therefore, the entire proceedings has been lapsed and liberty was granted
to deal with the property. The said order was also confirmed by the
Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court in W.A.(MD)No.265 of 2024 by an
order dated 28.02.2024.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.Nos.7792 of 2017 & 14138 of 2024
12. Heard the learned counsel appearing on either side and
perused the materials placed before this Court.
13. Admittedly, the total extent of the land which was subjected
for lay out is more than 28 acres viz., 1234990 sq.ft., for which the areas
of land have been categorized and reserved for specific purpose as
extracted hereunder:-
“kidg;gphpt[ ,lj;jpd; gug;gst[ : 28/34 Vh;
1234990 rJuo
xJf;fpa kidfs; :319
g{';fh :131938 rJuo
FHe;ijfs; tpisahLkplk; :28265 rJuo
jpwtplk; :26702 rJuo
????????
bkhj;jk; 186905 rJuo – 15/14
cs;shl;rpf;Fj; jhdkhf xg;gilf;f ntz;Lk;
cj;njr rhiy :382405 rJuo
filfs; 3 :14530 rJuo?1/12
rKjhaTlk; :10424 rJuo?0/80
bghJ cgnahfk; :16860 rJuo?1/30
kDjhuh; tpw;gidf;FhpaJ”
14. As per the lay out conditions, the place which is meant for
specific purpose cannot be used for other purposes. In this regard, the
circular was issued by the second respondent dated 29.06.1984 in
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.Nos.7792 of 2017 & 14138 of 2024
Roc.No.9798/1983-BCC, thereby issued instruction that the layouts
which are of less than ten acres in extent, 10% of such area should be
reserved for open space only such as parks, play fields, etc. In case of
layout of more than 10 acres in extent, 50% of the total reservation made
may be provided for public purposes like Kalyana mandapam,
Community hall, reading room, library etc., and the balance 50% may be
reserved as open space.
15. Thereafter, by the subsequent circular dated 24.05.1985 in
Roc.No.18150/85-01, the second respondent clarified that the reserved
area in the layout would include parks, play fields, community halls,
kalyana mandapam etc. The area reserved as open space like parks, play
fields, children play space alone need to be handed over to the executive
authority of the local body as they essentially belong to the category of
non commercial public purposes. The other reservations like kalyana
mandapam, community halls etc., belong to commercial category and the
developer should not be deprived of income which he may likely to get
by disposal of these plots as he has to surrender to the executive
authority of the local body a sizable amount of land by way of non-
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.Nos.7792 of 2017 & 14138 of 2024
commercial open spaces and instructions have already been issued that
the layouts which are of less than ten acres in extent, 10% of such area
should be reserved for open space only such as parks, play fields, etc. In
case of layout of more than 10 acres in extent, 50% of the total
reservation made may be provided for public purposes like Kalyana
mandapam, Community hall, reading room, library etc., and the balance
50% may be reserved as open space.
16. Accordingly 50% of the land which is earmarked for
commercial is saleable with a restriction that the purchaser should not
change the public purpose for which the land was reserved. Further as
per the subsequent cirular dated 17.08.1987, it was made clear that only
places earmarked for park, children play field alone should be gifted to
the local bodies. Therefore, though 50% of the land earmarked for
commercial purpose, it can be saleable with a condition that the
purchaser should not change the purpose for which the land was
reserved. Therefore, the judgments relied upon by the sixth respondent
are not applicable to the case on hand.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.Nos.7792 of 2017 & 14138 of 2024
17. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner relied upon
the judgment dated 23.11.2010, passed by the Hon'ble Division Bench of
this Court in A.Nos.38 & 39 of 2010 in the case of K.Rajamani & ors
Vs. Alamunagar Residents Welfare Association & ors., in which the
following issues were dealt with :-
“(i) Whether the Government would have power to
order de-reservation of a land reserved for public purpose
in a layout for use of other purpose?
(ii) Whether the open space earmarked in a layout for
use of park, etc., could be allowed to be put in use for any
other purpose?
(iii) Whether the provisions of the Land Acquisition
Act are to be followed for acquiring that land with reference
to the provisions of Section 36 of the Planning Act?
(iv) Whether the open space earmarked in a layout
could be considered to be the property of the Municipal
Corporation either in the absence of any declaration under
Section 37 or in the absence of any gift by the owner?”
Further all the issues were answered as follows :-
“11. Point No. (i): Before we delve upon the
provisions of the Tamil Nadu Town and Country Planning
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.Nos.7792 of 2017 & 14138 of 2024
Act, 1971, we may briefly refer to the object behind the
enactment. Green space is an essential feature in any
development, as it not only serves as lung space but also
meets the communal and recreational requirements of the
inhabitants. The reserved space is primarily meant for the
use of the occupants in any development. The residents or
purchasers of the plots are also obligated to maintain the
same as reserved space, namely, park, etc. Conservation of
such open space becomes more required, as the lands in
cities become more scarce, population increase and
infrastructure strain stimulate inhabitants demands. Open
space element is also a part of general development. In that
sense, land use planning is a process by which the land is
allocated to secure the rational and orderly development of
land in an environmentally sound manner to ensure the
creation of sustainable human settlements. The development
control function cannot and should not operate in a vacuum.
The process of land use planning primarily consists of the
two twin functions of the development/land use planning and
development control.
12. With the above object in mind, the Tamil Nadu
Town and Country Planning Act, 1971 Act (hereinafter
referred to as "the Planning Act") was enacted to regulate
the development of towns so as to secure to its present and
future inhabitants, sanitary conditions, amenity and
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.Nos.7792 of 2017 & 14138 of 2024
convenience as to the use of layout and use of lands. The Act
covers both the manner in which the development/land use
planning should be made and how the development should
be controlled. Thereafter, keeping in mind the eco-
expansion, certain amendments were made in the year 2002.
In order to decide as to whether the Government would have
power to de-reserve an open space earmarked for the use of
public, certain provisions of the Planning Act are relevant
to be referred. By the provisions of Section 3, appointments
of the Director of Town and Country Planning and other
officers are contemplated. By the provisions of Section 4, (i)
the regional planning authority; (ii) the local planning
authority; and (iii) the new town development authority
were constituted. The Tamil Nadu Town and Country
Planning Board consisting of high level Secretaries of
various departments, apart from the Minister in-charge of
Local Administration, was also provided. The Board was
empowered to guide, direct and assist the planning
authorities, advise in matters relating to planning, the
development and use of rural and urban land in the State
and to perform such other functions as the Government may
from time to time assign to it. In addition to the above, the
Board may also direct the preparation of development plans
by planning authorities.
13. For the development of Chennai city, Section 9A
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.Nos.7792 of 2017 & 14138 of 2024
provides the establishment of the Chennai Metropolitan
Development Authority with high ranking officials of the
Government. Section 9C of the Act relates to the functions
and powers of the Chennai Metropolitan Development
Authority, particularly to carry out the survey of the
Chennai Metropolitan Planning Area and prepare a master
plan or a detailed development plan or a new town
development plan, etc. For the implementation of the
development plans, the Government, in exercise of the
power under Section 10, declares certain areas as regional
planning areas, local planning areas and their
amalgamation and sub-division and inclusion from other
regions and local areas. Once the land is declared to be in
the regional planning area, the regional planning authority
shall prepare and submit a regional plan for the regional
planning area or any part of it. That plan would contain the
manner in which the land in the region shall be used, be it
residential, industrial, commercial, agricultural and
recreational purposes or as a forest area, for mineral
exploitation, transport and communication, water supply,
drainage, sewerage, etc., demarcation, conservation and
development of areas of natural scenic beauty, forest,
wildlife, natural resources and landscaping and so on.
Likewise, after the declaration of local planning area under
Section 10, the local planning authority, after consultation
with the regional planning authority and the local
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.Nos.7792 of 2017 & 14138 of 2024
authorities concerned, shall prepare and submit to the
Government a master plan for local planning area or any
part of it. The master plan may propose and provide, among
other things, the manner in which the land in the planning
area shall be used, the allotment of reservation of land for
residential, commercial, industrial and agricultural
purposes and for parks, play-fields and open spaces and for
other amenities. Likewise, after the declaration, the new
town development authority shall prepare a new town
development plan after consultation with the Director and
submit to the Government the new town development plan.
By the above provision, it could be seen that when the
Government decides to develop a particular area of land in
urban or rural area, it should make a declaration in this
regard by a notification in terms of Section 10.
14. The provisions of Sub-section (2) of Section 10
specify the development objectives that must be included in
the plan. In addition to the provisions contained in Part-V of
the Act (Amended by 2002 Act), the development plan shall
include a housing strategy for the area of the plan. The
objectives specified in Section 10 together with the housing
strategy are mandatory requirements. Section 10(2)(a) of
the 2002 Act requires that a development plan shall include
the demarcation of land and particular area for the use
solely or primarily for particular purposes, be it residential,
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.Nos.7792 of 2017 & 14138 of 2024
commercial, industrial, agricultural, recreational (be it
open space or otherwise or a mixture of these uses) and to
such extent as the proper planning and sustainable
development of the area as in the opinion of the planning
authority necessary. The plan could be thereafter approved
by the Government in terms of Section 26 of the Planning
Act. On the basis of such declaration, once a regional plan,
master plan or new town development plan is approved, the
Government is competent to vary, revoke or modify such
regional plan, master plan and new town development plan
under Section 32 of the Act. After the above approval of the
Government under Section 28, subject to variation,
revocation and modification under Section 32, the
Government can acquire those lands in terms of Section 36
of the Act. Once the plan is approved and the lands are
acquired, the new town development authority could dispose
of the land to such person in such manner and subject to
such terms and conditions in terms of Section 40. After such
disposal, the land shall be put to use only in conformity with
the development plan.
15. Chapter-III of the Planning Act with provisions of
Sections 10 - 35 relates to the declaration of planning areas,
preparation of development plans by planning authorities,
approval of the government to such development plan and
power to vary, revoke or modify such approved plans.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.Nos.7792 of 2017 & 14138 of 2024
Chapter-IV of the Planning Act with the provisions of
Sections 36 - 39 relates to the acquisition of land covered by
the development plan by invoking the provisions of the Land
Acquisition Act for being placed before the appropriate
local planning authority. That chapter also includes the
release of land if not declared within three years of the
notification under Section 26/27 of the Planning Act.
Chapter-V with the provisions of Sections 40 - 46 relates to
the special provisions regarding new town development
authority. By that chapter, the land acquired under Chapter-
IV is placed at the disposal of the new town planning
authority and related matters. Chapter-VI of the Planning
Act with the provisions of Sections 47 - 58 relates to the
control of development and use of land. The planning
authority shall either grant permission subject to the
provisions of the development control rules relating to the
minimum requirement of open space for road and other
purposes including open lung space for common use. There
is clear demarcation of the provisions of constitution of
planning authorities, submission of their proposal for
regional plan, master plan and new town development plan
to the Government, the acquisition of those lands vis-a-vis
the power of the new town development authority to grant
permission for execution of work or construction on such
land with such conditions. While the earlier part of the
enactment relates to the development of a particular area in
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.Nos.7792 of 2017 & 14138 of 2024
the regional plan, master plan or new town development
plan, the latter part of the enactment relates to the usage of
the developed area in conformity with the development
control rules.
16. A reading of the above provisions shows that if
large extent of land is acquired by the Government on the
basis of the proposal of the regional planning authority and
subsequently the master plan authority and new town
development authority for commercial, residential,
industrial, etc., zone, those lands should not be put to use
for any other purpose except to the extent of variation,
revocation, modification under Section 32 of the Act. But
once the land is acquired under Section 36 and is placed at
the disposal of the new town development authority for
further disposal to such person, the proposal of the regional
planning authority for new town development and approved
by the Government cannot be varied, revoked or modified by
the Government.
17. For our purpose, the extent of land in a new town
development area owned by a private person shall be used
only in conformity with such development as provided under
Section 47 of the Act. For such use, such person should
apply to the appropriate planning authority for permission
to erect any building or make or extend any excavation or
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.Nos.7792 of 2017 & 14138 of 2024
carry out any mining or other operation, make any material
change in the use of the land or construct, form or lay out
any work. For that purpose, one should make an application
for permission under Section 49. In terms of Sub-section (2)
of Section 49, the appropriate planning authority is required
to consider the purpose for which the permission is
required, the suitability of the place for such purpose and
the future development and maintenance of the planning
area. In terms of Sub-section (3) of Section 49, the
appropriate planning authority may also refuse to grant
permission to any person, but by giving reasons thereof.
Once the planning permission is granted, the appropriate
planning authority would have power to either revoke or
modify the permission granted in terms of Section 54 of the
Act. Of course, there is a general power conferred on the
Government under Section 90 of the Act to call for records,
examine the same and pass orders after satisfying
themselves as to the regularity of such proceedings or
correctness, legality or propriety or any decision passed or
made therein. This power would be available to the
Government only in respect of either the permission granted
or refused by the appropriate planning authority for a land
to be put into use in a developed area. This power cannot be
extended to the permission accorded by the Government for
the purpose of approval granted by it in terms of Section 28
for regional plan, master plan or the new town development
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.Nos.7792 of 2017 & 14138 of 2024
plan, as those plans could be varied, revoked or modified
only under Section 32. In our considered view, such power
cannot be extended to alter, revoke or modify the conditions
imposed in the layout plan. In that view of the matter, we
hold that once such permission is accorded and in that
permission if a specified area is earmarked for public
purpose, even the planning authority shall not have power
to exempt that land for being put to use for any other
purpose. In that context, the State Government also cannot
have any jurisdiction to alter the conditions imposed in the
layout, whereby certain lands are earmarked as open space
to be used for public purposes.”
Thus, it is clear that the government has no power to de-reserve the land.
Therefore, the land which was originally earmarked for commercial
purpose as per the lay out cannot be converted into house plots.
18. That apart, when this Court already seized the matter with
regard to conversion of the land and technical approval, the fourth
respondent ought not to have granted planning and building permission
in the subject property. In fact, while pending the first writ petition in
W.P.No.7792 of 2017, the sixth respondent purchased the subject
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.Nos.7792 of 2017 & 14138 of 2024
property and applied for planning and building permission. As stated
supra, the sixth respondent can purchase the land with a restriction that
he should not change the purpose for which the said land was originally
reserved as per the lay out.
19. In view of the above discussions, the impugned orders dated
19.10.2016, 16.11.2016 issued by the second and third respondents
respectively and the planning and building permission dated 13.02.2024,
granted by the fourth respondent in No.72/24, are hereby quashed.
Accordingly, both the Writ Petitions stand allowed. Consequently,
connected miscellaneous petitions are closed. There shall be no order as
to costs.
28.10.2024
Index : Yes/No
Speaking/Non Speaking order
Neutral Citation : Yes/No
rts
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.Nos.7792 of 2017 & 14138 of 2024
G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN. J,
rts
To
1. The Secretary to Government,
Housing and Urban Development Department,
Chief Secretariat,
Fort St. George,
Chennai-600 009
2. The Commissioner,
Town and Country Planning,
No.807, Anna Salai,
Chennai - 600 002.
3. The Member Secretary,
Hosur New Town Development Authority,
Hosur,
Krishnagiri District.
4. The Commissioner,
Hosur Municipal Corporation,
Hosur, Krishnagiri District.
5. M/s. Vakil Housing Development Corporation P. Ltd
Registered Office:- 78,
Koramangala Industrial Area,
Jyothinivas College Road,
Koramangala, Bangalore-95.
6. The Sub Registrar,
Hosur.
COMMON ORDER IN
W.P.Nos.7792 of 2017 & 14138 of 2024 and
W.M.P.Nos.8536, 8537, 15325 & 15326 of 2024
28.10.2024
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
