Madras High Court
Champalal G Bafna vs The Director Of Town & Country Planning on 14 February, 2025
Author: J.Sathya Narayana Prasad
Bench: J.Sathya Narayana Prasad
W.P.No.32815 of 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 14.02.2025
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE J.SATHYA NARAYANA PRASAD
W.P.No.32815 of 2024
1.Champalal G Bafna
2.Prakash Chandra Bafna
3.Sripal Champalal Bafna
4.Anmol A Bafna
5.Arunkumar G Bafna
6.Sherenik J Bafna ...Petitioners
-Vs-
1.The Director of Town & Country Planning,
Office of the Directorate of Town & Country Planning,
Second, Third and Fourth Floors,
E & C Market Road,
Koyambedu, Chennai – 600 107.
2.The Member Secretary,
Coimbatore Local Planning Authority,
Office of the Coimbatore Local Planning Authority,
Coimbatore.
3.The Joint Director of Town & Country Planning,
Coimbatore Region,
O/o The District Town & Country Planning,
Coimbatore.
4.The Commissioner,
Coimbatore Municipal Corporation,
Coimbatore. ...Respondents
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
1/18
W.P.No.32815 of 2024
Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India,
praying for the issuance of a direction in the nature of Writ of Declaration, to
declare that the property comprised in 706/2, 707/2 and 708/1A, together
measuring to an extent of acre 7.55 cents, situated at Vadavalli Village,
Coimbatore South Taluk, Coimbatore District (property) forming part of
MAP No.3, DDP/(CNR)No.(Consented) for Coimbatore Local Planning
Area Vadavalli Detailed Development Plan No.09, which was approved by
the third respondent herein for a C-C-40 Feet Road and B5-B5-50 Feet road,
to have lapsed in the light of Section 38 of the Tamil Nadu Town and
Country Planning Act, 1971 (TN Act 35 of 1974) and the decisions of this
Court in W.P(MD)No.8515 of 2021 dated 25.06.2021, W.P.No.106 of 2022
dated 07.01.2022, W.P.No.538 of 2022 dated 19.01.2022 and W.P.No.22384
of 2023 dated 22.08.2023 and directed the respondents to release the above
said lands to the petitioners and pass such further orders.
For Petitioners : M/s.P.Tamil Mani
For R1 to R3 : Mr.Naveen Kumar,
Government Advocate
For R4 : Mr.K.M.Mukilan
ORDER
This writ petition has been filed to declare that the property
comprised in 706/2, 707/2 and 708/1A, together measuring to an extent of
acre 7.55 cents, situated at Vadavalli Village, Coimbatore South Taluk,
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Coimbatore District (property) forming part of MAP No.3,
DDP/(CNR)No.(Consented) for Coimbatore Local Planning Area Vadavalli
Detailed Development Plan No.09, which was approved by the third
respondent herein for a C-C-40 Feet Road and B5-B5-50 Feet road, to have
lapsed in the light of Section 38 of the Tamil Nadu Town and Country
Planning Act, 1971 (TN Act 35 of 1974) and the decisions of this Court in
W.P(MD)No.8515 of 2021 dated 25.06.2021, W.P.No.106 of 2022 dated
07.01.2022, W.P.No.538 of 2022 dated 19.01.2022 and W.P.No.22384 of
2023 dated 22.08.2023 and directed the respondents to release the above said
lands to the petitioners.
2. The 1st Petitioner and the 5th Petitioner have acquired the land
situated at Vadavalli village comprised in S.No.706/2, measuring to an
extent of 2.46 acres and in S.No.707/2 measuring 3.17, totally an extent of
5.63 acres purchased by a sale deed dated 06.08.1990 duly registered as
D.No.2885/1990 on the file Joint II SRO Coimbatore. The 1st Petitioner has
executed a deed of settlement dated 07.08.2018 to and in favour of the 2nd
Petitioner duly registered as D.No.5274/2018 on the file of Joint II SRO
Coimbatore, by which he settled the land situated at Vadavalli village
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
measuring to an extent of 1.00 acre comprised in S.No 706/2 and in S.No.
707/2 out of his share of 2.81½ cents. Balance of 1.81 ½ cents of land settled
to 3rd petitioner in Document No.6254/2023 dated 25.08.2023 on the file of
the Joint II SRO Coimbatore in the above Survey Nos.706/2 and 707/2,
Vadavalli Village.
3. The 5th Petitioner has executed a deed of settlement dated
01.09.2023 to and in favour of the 4th Petitioner duly registered as
D.No.6469/2023 on the file of Joint II SRO Coimbatore, by which he settled
the land measuring to an extent of 1.00 acre and retaining 1.81 ½ cents with
him comprised in S.No 706/2 and in S.No. 707/2 of Vadavalli village.
4. The 6th Petitioner acquired the land comprised in S.No.708/IA of
Vadavalli Village measuring to the extent of 0.96 cents out of 1.92 cents vide
a Deed of Release dated 16.09.2014, duly registered as D.No.5296/2014 on
the file Joint II SRO, Coimbatore. Thereafter, the 1st Petitioner acquired the
land measuring to the extent of 0.96 cents out of 1.92 cents comprised S.Nos
708/1A of Vadavalli Village vide a release deed dated 08.08.2023, duly
registered as D.No.5774/2023 on the file Joint II SRO, Coimbatore.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
5. When the petitioners intended to develop the property recently, the
petitioners were informed by the respondents that their lands, comprised the
Sub divisions in S.No.706/2, S.Nos.707/2, & 708/1A totally measuring to an
extent of 7.55 cents were approved by the third Respondent herein through a
development plan for forming the C-C-40 feet road & B5-B5-50 feet Road
for public purpose. Aggrieved by the same, the Petitioners have come up
with the present Writ Petition.
6. Learned counsel appearing for the Petitioners would submit that as
per the above Development Plan, the property has not been acquired till this
day by the respondents. As per Section 37 of the Tamil Nadu Town and
Country Planning Act, 1971, if the Authority reserves any lands of any
private persons to be required for any purpose under the Detailed
Development Plan, the same shall be acquired by invoking the provisions of
the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (Central Act 1/1894). While Section 38 of
the Act contemplates that, if such acquisition is not completed within 3 years
from the date of publication of the Development Plan, the land will be
deemed to have been released from the reservation made under the
Development Plan.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
7. Learned counsel for the Petitioners relied on the order passed by
this Court in W.P.(MD) No.8515 of 2021 dated. 25.06.2021, wherein this
Court held that the reservation made under the Detailed Development Plan
stands lapsed and released and handed over to the landowners. Thereafter,
this Court also passed various orders as declared in the detailed Development
Plan, which stands lapsed in W.P.No.106 of 2022 dated 07.01.2022,
W.P.No.538/2022 dated 19.01.2022 and W.P.No.22384/2023 dated
22.08.2023.
8. Heard both sides and perused the materials available on record.
9. This Court passed an order in a similar case of A.Kondasamy Vs.
The Director of Town & Country Planning, Office of the Directorate of
Town and Country Planning, 2nd, 3rd and 4th Floor, E & C Market Road,
Koyambedu, Chennai – 600 107 and others in W.P.No.25243 of 2021,
which held as follows:
“5. This Court has consistently held that if the land has
not been acquired within a period of three years from the date
of publishing the detailed development plan in the Gazette,
the concerned lands shall be deemed to be released from such
reservation. In the present case, the respondents had failed to
take any steps to acquire the subject land therefore, by
operation of Section 38 of the Act, the scheme has lapsed.”
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
b) In the case Alagirisamy Vs. The Director of Town & Country
Planning, 807, Anna Salai, Chennai, Chennai District and others in
W.P.No.27672 of 2022, which held as follows:
“4. The main issue that has been urged before this
Court is that the detailed development plan has lapsed as per
Section 38 of the Tamil Nadu Town and Country Planning
Act, since the land has not been acquired within a period of
three years from the date of publication of the notice under
the Tamil Nadu Gazette.
5. It is not necessary for this Court to dwell much on
the entire allegation in the Writ Petition, since for the very
same detailed development scheme, a Division Bench of this
Court in W.A (MD) No.485 of 2020 has held that the scheme
had lapsed by virtue of Section 38 of the Tamil Nadu Town
and Country Planning Act. The relevant portions in the
judgment are extracted hereunder :
“11. As rightly pointed out by the learned counsel
appearing for the respondents/writ petitioner that the
counter affidavit proceeds on the merits of the claim and in
no way deal with deemed lapse and in the considered
opinion of this Court, the learned Judge, on correct
appreciation of facts and by applying the legal position as
enumerated in the above said judgment, allowed the writ
petition. This Court, on going through the reasons assigned
in the impugned order, is of the considered view that there
is no infirmity or error apparent on the face of the record for
the reason assigned by the learned Single Judge for allowing
the writ petition and finds that the writ appeal lacks merits.
12. It is also brought to the knowledge of this Court
that the writ appeal filed by the official respondents in
WA(MD) No.340 of 2020, against the order dated
27.02.2017 in W.P.(MD) No.14456 of 2014 was also
dismissed on 02.03.2020.?”
6. This Court has consistently held that if the land has
not been acquired within a period of three years from the date
of publishing the detailed development plan in the Gazette,
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
the concerned lands shall be deemed to be released from such
reservation. It will be beneficial to provide the details of the
cases, wherein this Court had reached such a conclusion :
1. M.Amsavalli v. Director of Town and Country
Planning reported in (2017) 2 CWC 418.
2. RM.Shanmuganathan v. Director of Town and
Country Planning reported in (2018) 2 CWC 20.
3. W.P.(MD) No.5652 of 2019 (LKS Mohammed
Meera Mohaideen v. Director of Town and Country
Planning)
4. W.A.(MD) No.485 of 2020 (The Director of
Town and Country Planning and another v. Muthu and
others) and
5. W.P.(MD) No.166 of 2021 (Nagendran v. The
Director of Town and Country Planning).
Section 38 of the Tamilnadu Town and Country
Planning Act reads as follows :
38. Release of land - If within three years from the
date of the publication of the notice in the Tamil Nadu
Government Gazette under section 26 or section 27~ (a) no
declaration as provided in sub~section (2) of section 37 is
published in respect of any land reserved, allotted or
designated for any purpose specified in a regional plan,
master plan, detailed development plan or new town
development plan covered by such notice; or (b) such land
is not acquired by agreement, such land shall be deemed to
be released from such reservation, allotment or designation.
7. In the present case, the detailed development plan
was notified under Section 37 of the Act in the year 2007.
However, the respondents failed to take any steps to acquire
the land and therefore, by operation of Section 38, the scheme
lapsed.”
c) In the case of M/s.C.Vasanthadevi and another Vs. The
Secretary, Housing and Urban Development Department, Fort
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
St.George, Chennai – 600 015 and others in W.P.No.29069 of 2022,
which held as follows:
“4. The main issue that has been urged before this
Court is that the detailed development plan has lapsed as per
Section 38 of the Tamil Nadu Town and Country Planning
Act, since the land has not been acquired within a period of
three years from the date of publication of the notice under
the Tamil Nadu Gazette.
5. It is not necessary for this Court to dwell much on
the entire allegation in the Writ Petition, since for the very
same detailed development scheme, a Division Bench of this
Court in W.A (MD) No.485 of 2020 has held that the scheme
had lapsed by virtue of Section 38 of the Tamil Nadu Town
and Country Planning Act. The relevant portions in the
judgment are extracted hereunder :
11. As rightly pointed out by the learned counsel
appearing for the respondents/writ petitioners that the
counter affidavit proceeds on the merits of the claim and in
no way deal with deemed lapse and in the considered
opinion of this Court, the learned Judge, on correct
appreciation of facts and by applying the legal position as
enumerated in the above said judgment, allowed the writ
petition. This Court, on going through the reasons assigned
in the impugned order, is of the considered view that there is
no infirmity or error apparent on the face of the record for
the reason assigned by the learned Single Judge for allowing
the writ petition and finds that the writ appeal lacks merits.
12. It is also brought to the knowledge of this Court
that the writ appeal filed by the official respondents in
WA(MD) No.340 of 2020, against the order dated
27.02.2017 in W.P.(MD) No.14456 of 2014 was also
dismissed on 02.03.2020.?
6. This Court has consistently held that if the land has
not been acquired within a period of three years from the date
of publishing the detailed development plan in the Gazette,
the concerned lands shall be deemed to be released from such
reservation. It will be beneficial to provide the details of the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
cases, wherein this Court had reached such a conclusion :
1. M.Amsavalli v. Director of Town and Country
Planning reported in (2017) 2 CWC 418.
2. RM.Shanmuganathan v. Director of Town and
Country Planning reported in (2018) 2 CWC 20.
3. W.P.(MD) No.5652 of 2019 (LKS Mohammed
Meera Mohaideen v. Director of Town and Country
Planning)
4. W.A.(MD) No.485 of 2020 (The Director of Town
and Country Planning and another v. Muthu and others) and
5. W.P.(MD) No.166 of 2021 (Nagendran v. The
Director of Town and Country Planning).
Section 38 of the Tamilnadu Town and Country
Planning Act reads as follows :
38. Release of land.- If within three years from the
date of the publication of the notice in the Tamil Nadu
Government Gazette under section 26 or section 27~ (a) no
declaration as provided in sub~section (2) of section 37 is
published in respect of any land reserved, allotted or
designated for any purpose specified in a regional plan,
master plan, detailed development plan or new town
development plan covered by such notice; or (b) such land is
not acquired by agreement, such land shall be deemed to be
released from such reservation, allotment or designation.
7. In the present case, the detailed development plan
was notified under Section 37 of the Act in the year 2007.
However, the respondents failed to take any steps to acquire
the land and therefore, by operation of Section 38, the scheme
lapsed.”
d) In the case of V.Vijayalakshmi Vs. The Managing Director,
Office of Director Municipality, Chepauk, Near Anna Square, Chennai –
600 005 and others in W.P.No.29297 of 2022, which held as follows:
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
“4. The main issue that has been urged before this
Court is that the detailed development plan has lapsed as per
Section 38 of the Tamil Nadu Town and Country Planning
Act, since the land has not been acquired within a period of
three years from the date of publication of the notice under
the Tamil Nadu Gazette.
5. It is not necessary for this Court to dwell much on
the entire allegation in the Writ Petition, since for the very
same detailed development scheme, a Division Bench of this
Court in W.A (MD) No.485 of 2020 has held that the scheme
had lapsed by virtue of Section 38 of the Tamil Nadu Town
and Country Planning Act. The relevant portions in the
judgment are extracted hereunder :
11. As rightly pointed out by the learned counsel
appearing for the respondents/writ petitioners that the
counter affidavit proceeds on the merits of the claim and in
no way deal with deemed lapse and in the considered
opinion of this Court, the learned Judge, on correct
appreciation of facts and by applying the legal position as
enumerated in the above said judgment, allowed the writ
petition. This Court, on going through the reasons assigned
in the impugned order, is of the considered view that there is
no infirmity or error apparent on the face of the record for
the reason assigned by the learned Single Judge for allowing
the writ petition and finds that the writ appeal lacks merits.
12. It is also brought to the knowledge of this Court
that the writ appeal filed by the official respondents in
WA(MD) No.340 of 2020, against the order dated
27.02.2017 in W.P.(MD) No.14456 of 2014 was also
dismissed on 02.03.2020.?
6. This Court has consistently held that if the land has
not been acquired within a period of three years from the date
of publishing the detailed development plan in the Gazette,
the concerned lands shall be deemed to be released from such
reservation. It will be beneficial to provide the details of the
cases, wherein this Court had reached such a conclusion :
1. M.Amsavalli v. Director of Town and Country
Planning reported in (2017) 2 CWC 418.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
2. RM.Shanmuganathan v. Director of Town and
Country Planning reported in (2018) 2 CWC 20.
3. W.P.(MD) No.5652 of 2019 (LKS Mohammed
Meera Mohaideen v. Director of Town and Country
Planning)
4. W.A.(MD) No.485 of 2020 (The Director of Town
and Country Planning and another v. Muthu and others) and
5. W.P.(MD) No.166 of 2021 (Nagendran v. The
Director of Town and Country Planning).
Section 38 of the Tamilnadu Town and Country
Planning Act reads as follows :
38. Release of land.- If within three years from the
date of the publication of the notice in the Tamil Nadu
Government Gazette under section 26 or section 27~ (a) no
declaration as provided in sub~section (2) of section 37 is
published in respect of any land reserved, allotted or
designated for any purpose specified in a regional plan,
master plan, detailed development plan or new town
development plan covered by such notice; or (b) such land is
not acquired by agreement, such land shall be deemed to be
released from such reservation, allotment or designation.
7. In the present case, the detailed development plan
was notified under Section 37 of the Act in the year 2007.
However, the respondents failed to take any steps to acquire
the land and therefore, by operation of Section 38, the scheme
lapsed.”
e) In the case of S.Ponnusamy and others Vs. The Director of Town
& Country Planning, Office of Directorate of Town & Country
Planning, Second, Third and Fourth Floors, E & C Market Road,
Koyambedu, Chennai – 600 107 and others in W.P.No.30168 of 2022,
which held as follows:
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
“4. The main issue that has been urged before this
Court is that the detailed development plan has lapsed as per
Section 38 of the Tamil Nadu Town and Country Planning
Act, since the land has not been acquired within a period of
three years from the date of publication of the notice under
the Tamil Nadu Gazette.
5. It is not necessary for this Court to dwell much on
the entire allegation in the Writ Petition, since for the very
same detailed development scheme, a Division Bench of this
Court in W.A (MD) No.485 of 2020 has held that the scheme
had lapsed by virtue of Section 38 of the Tamil Nadu Town
and Country Planning Act. The relevant portions in the
judgment are extracted hereunder :
11. As rightly pointed out by the learned counsel
appearing for the respondents/writ petitioners that the
counter affidavit proceeds on the merits of the claim and in
no way deal with deemed lapse and in the considered
opinion of this Court, the learned Judge, on correct
appreciation of facts and by applying the legal position as
enumerated in the above said judgment, allowed the writ
petition. This Court, on going through the reasons assigned
in the impugned order, is of the considered view that there is
no infirmity or error apparent on the face of the record for
the reason assigned by the learned Single Judge for allowing
the writ petition and finds that the writ appeal lacks merits.
12. It is also brought to the knowledge of this Court
that the writ appeal filed by the official respondents in
WA(MD) No.340 of 2020, against the order dated
27.02.2017 in W.P.(MD) No.14456 of 2014 was also
dismissed on 02.03.2020.?
6. This Court has consistently held that if the land has
not been acquired within a period of three years from the date
of publishing the detailed development plan in the Gazette,
the concerned lands shall be deemed to be released from such
reservation. It will be beneficial to provide the details of the
cases, wherein this Court had reached such a conclusion :
1. M.Amsavalli v. Director of Town and Country
Planning reported in (2017) 2 CWC 418.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
2. RM.Shanmuganathan v. Director of Town and
Country Planning reported in (2018) 2 CWC 20.
3. W.P.(MD) No.5652 of 2019 (LKS Mohammed
Meera Mohaideen v. Director of Town and Country
Planning)
4. W.A.(MD) No.485 of 2020 (The Director of Town
and Country Planning and another v. Muthu and others) and
5. W.P.(MD) No.166 of 2021 (Nagendran v. The
Director of Town and Country Planning).
Section 38 of the Tamilnadu Town and Country
Planning Act reads as follows :
38. Release of land.- If within three years from the
date of the publication of the notice in the Tamil Nadu
Government Gazette under section 26 or section 27~ (a) no
declaration as provided in sub~section (2) of section 37 is
published in respect of any land reserved, allotted or
designated for any purpose specified in a regional plan,
master plan, detailed development plan or new town
development plan covered by such notice; or (b) such land is
not acquired by agreement, such land shall be deemed to be
released from such reservation, allotment or designation.
7. In the present case, the detailed development plan
was notified under Section 37 of the Act in the year 2007.
However, the respondents failed to take any steps to acquire
the land and therefore, by operation of Section 38, the scheme
lapsed.”
f) In the case of Ramesh Chand and others Vs. The Commissioner,
Directorate of Town & Country Planning, Chengalvarayan Building, 4th
Floor, 807, Anna Salai, Chennai – 600 002 and others in W.P.No.31752
of 2022, which held as follows:
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
“4. Admittedly, though the scheme road was proposed
to be constructed, no steps have been taken by the
respondents to acquire the land as per Section 38 of the Tamil
Nadu Town Country Planning Act, which reads as follows :
“38. Release of land.- If within three years from the
date of the publication of the notice in the Tamil Nadu
Government Gazette under section 26 or section 27- (a) no
declaration as provided in sub-section (2) of section 37 is
published in respect of any land reserved, allotted or
designated for any purpose specified in a regional plan,
master plan, detailed development plan or new town
development plan covered by such notice; or (b) such land
is not acquired by agreement, such land shall be deemed to
be released from such reservation, allotment or
designation.”
5. Having regard to the above section and as steps has
not been taken to acquire the land within three years as per
the above section, the respondent shall, without reference to
the original proposal of the ring road, is directed to consider
the representation of the petitioners on its own merits.”
g) In the case of M.Shanmugharaj Vs. The Director of Town &
Country Planning, Office of Directorate of Town & Country Planning,
Second, Third and Fourth Floors, E & C Market Road, Koyambedu,
Chennai – 600 107 and others in W.P.No.30169 of 2022, which held as
follows:
“4. Learned counsel for the petitioner would
submit that only an extent of 4.85 acres have been developed
as a layout. While developing the layout, necessary lands
have been gifted by gift deed bearing No.10974/2019.
According to him, as far as the land already gifted in respect
of a layout forming 4.85 acres, he is not claiming any right
over the gifted properties. Only he seeks the declaration in
respect of the remaining properties as the acquisition has not
happened within a period of three years, as contemplated
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
under Section 38 of Tamilnadu Town and Country Planning
Act, 1971.
5. Learned counsel for the respondents would
submit that since the lands have already been gifted, the
petitioner cannot have any right over the property. The entire
extent of 7.04 acres was shown in a detailed development
plan No.8 of the respondents for the purpose of constructing
Elementary School, High school and Play ground. Though the
declaration has been made on 15.07.1992, the land has not
been acquired within a period of three years.
6. It is relevant to note that Section 38 of
Tamilnadu Town and Country Planning Act, 1971, reads as
follows:-
“38. Release of land:- If within three years from
the date of the publication of the notice in the Tamil Nadu
Government Gazette under Section 26 or Section 27- (a) no
declaration as provided in sub-section 26 or section 27- (a)
no declaration as provided in sub-section (2) of section 37
is published in respect of any land reserved, allotted or
designated for any purpose specified in a regional plan,
master plan, detailed development plan or new town
development plan covered by such notice: or
(b) such land is not acquired by agreement, such land shall
be deemed to be released from such reservation, allotment
or designation.”
7. However, it is admitted case that the land has
not been acquired within a period of three years. In such view
of the matter, as per Section 38 of the Tamilnadu Town and
Country Planning Act, the remaining area other than the
layout already developed shall be released from the
development plan. It is also made clear that in future, if the
Government intends to acquire the land for any other
purposes, this order will not bar for the Government in view
of the provision of Land Acquisition Act. Similarly, any
application is filed or pending for regularisation of
unapproved layout, such application shall be dealt as per
Tamilnadu Town and Country Planning Act, 1971, on its own
merits, strictly in terms of the Rules.”
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
10. In view of the above ratios laid down by this Court, this Court
is of the considered view that the property comprised in 706/2, 707/2 and
708/1A, together measuring to an extent of acre 7.55 cents, situated at
Vadavalli Village, Coimbatore South Taluk, Coimbatore District (property)
forming part of MAP No.3, DDP/(CNR)No.(Consented) for Coimbatore
Local Planning Area Vadavalli Detailed Development Plan No.09, which
was approved by the third respondent herein for a C-C-40 Feet Road and B5-
B5-50 Feet road, declared to have lapsed in the light of Section 38 of the
Tamil Nadu Town and Country Planning Act, 1971 and the respondents are
directed to release the above said lands to the petitioner within a period of
two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
In the result, this writ petition stands allowed with the above
observations. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is
closed.
14.02.2025
cda
Index : Yes/No
Speaking/Non Speaking order
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
J.SATHYA NARAYANA PRASAD, J.
cda
To
1.The Director of Town & Country Planning,
Office of the Directorate of Town & Country Planning,
Second, Third and Fourth Floors,
E & C Market Road,
Koyambedu, Chennai – 600 107.
2.The Member Secretary,
Coimbatore Local Planning Authority,
Office of the Coimbatore Local Planning Authority,
Coimbatore.
3.The Joint Director of Town & Country Planning,
Coimbatore Region,
O/o The District Town & Country Planning,
Coimbatore.
4.The Commissioner,
Coimbatore Municipal Corporation,
Coimbatore.
14.02.2025
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
