Madras High Court
Kaleelur Rahman vs The State Of Tamil Nadu on 8 April, 2025
W.P.(MD)No.9816 of 2025
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 08.04.2025
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE VIVEK KUMAR SINGH
W.P.(MD)No.9816 of 2025
Kaleelur Rahman : Petitioner
Vs.
1. The State of Tamil Nadu,
Represented by its Secretary,
Housing and Urban Development Department,
Fort St.George,
Chennai.
2. The Director of Town and Country Planning,
Directorate of Town and Country Planning,
E & C Market Road,
Koyembedu, Chennai.
3. The Assistant Director / Member Secretary,
Tirunelveli Town and Country Planning Authority,
Corporation Office Campus,
Tirunelveli. : Respondents
PRAYER: Writ Petitions filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of
India for issuance of Writ of Mandamus, directing the third respondent to
grant planning permission for the development / construction in the
petitioner land in Survey No. 784/1C situated in Suthamalli Ward T
Block - 03, Tirunelveli Taluk, Tirunelveli District by considering the
application dated 08.11.2024.
1/6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 22/04/2025 03:28:31 pm )
W.P.(MD)No.9816 of 2025
For Petitioner : Mr.K.Navaneetharaja
For Respondents : Mr.C.Venkatesh Kumar
Spl. Government Pleader
for R1 to R4
Mr.K.Gnanasekaran
Government Advocate (Crl.) for R5
ORDER
This Writ Petition has been filed seeking a direction to the
third respondent to grant planning permission for the
development/construction in the petitioner's land in Survey No.784/1C,
situated in Suthamalli Ward, T Block - 03, Tirunelveli Taluk, Tirunelveli
District, by considering his application dated 08.11.2024.
2. Heard the learned counsel for the parties. By consent of
both parties, the Writ Petition is taken up for final disposal at the
admission stage itself.
3. The petitioner claims to be the owner of the property
mentioned in the petition. He executed a lease deed in favour of one
Mohammed Hussain vide Document No.4093 of 2023, dated 12.09.2023,
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 22/04/2025 03:28:31 pm )
for the establishment of a petrol retail pump outlet. The grievance of the
petitioner is that, his tenant applied for building plan permission on
08.11.2024, before the third respondent. However, the application was
not considered on the ground that, the petitioner's land was earmarked for
public utility under the detailed development plan and therefore, building
plan approval could not be granted. According to the petitioner, although
the detailed development plan was notified on 21.12.1988, it has not
taken effect to date and has lapsed. However, without considering this,
the application of the tenant has been kept pending. Aggrieved by the
same, the petitioner has filed the present writ petition.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that,
it would suffice, if this Court issues a direction to the third respondent to
consider the application of the petitioner dated 08.11.2024 in accordance
with the judgment of this Court in W.A (MD) No.485 of 2020, order
dated 21.07.2020.
5. It is needless to point out that whenever a representation
of this nature is made to a Statutory Authority, there is a duty cast upon
him to consider the same on its own merits and pass appropriate orders in
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 22/04/2025 03:28:31 pm )
one way or other, instead of keeping the same pending indefinitely. As
such, non-consideration of the representation by the Statutory Authority
would amount to dereliction of duty and hence, this Court will be
justified in invoking its extraordinary powers under Article 226 of the
Constitution of India and direct them to consider the same within a
stipulated time.
6. In the light of the above observations, there shall be a
direction to the third respondent to consider the petitioner's application
dated 08.11.2024, on its own merits and pass appropriate orders in
accordance with law, in the light of the judgment of this Court in W.A
(MD) No.485 of 2020, order dated 21.07.2020. The third respondent
shall also give due opportunity to the petitioner, as well as all the other
persons, who may be interested in the subject matter, within a period of
eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. It is also
made clear that this Court has not expressed any of its views with regard
to the merits of the matter and that it is open to the third respondent to
consider the same on its own merits.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 22/04/2025 03:28:31 pm )
7. With the above directions, the Writ Petition stands
disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.
08.04.2025
Index : Yes / No
Internet : Yes / No
PKN
To
1. The State of Tamil Nadu,
Represented by its Secretary,
Housing and Urban Development Department,
Fort St.George,
Chennai.
2. The Director of Town and Country Planning,
Directorate of Town and Country Planning,
E & C Market Road,
Koyembedu, Chennai.
3. The Assistant Director / Member Secretary,
Tirunelveli Town and Country Planning Authority,
Corporation Office Campus,
Tirunelveli.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 22/04/2025 03:28:31 pm )
VIVEK KUMAR SINGH, J.
PKN
08.04.2025
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 22/04/2025 03:28:31 pm )
