Madras High Court
M.N.Murugappa Girls Higher Secondary ... vs The Director Of Town & Country Planning on 18 June, 2025
W.P.No.15837 of 2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 18.06.2025
CORAM :
THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE N.MALA
Writ Petition No.15837 of 2025
M.N.Murugappa Girls Higher Secondary School Committee,
Represented by its President,
Mr.K.Veera Senthil
Door No.251, B.S.Sundaram Road,
Palayakkadu,
Tiruppur-District-641 601 ... Petitioner
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.Assistant Director,
Town & Country Planning,
Office of the District Town & Country Planning,
First Floor, Kumaran Commercial Complex,
Tirupur.
3.The Commissioner,
Tirupur Municipal Corporation,
Tirupur. … Respondents
Page No.1 of 22
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 26/06/2025 03:46:52 pm )
W.P.No.15837 of 2025
PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India praying
for issuance of Writ of Declaration, to declare that the property comprised in Old
S.No.251, Old Ward F, Old Block No.9, Old T.S. No.7/2 and New Ward F, New
Block No.149, New T.S.No.4, of Mannarai Village, measuring to an extent of
acres 4.50 cents, situated at Mannarai Village, Tirupur North Taluk, Tirupur
District (property) is in forming part of Tiruppur Local Planning Area-Detailed
Development Plan-16, MAP No.4, for the purpose of forming the E2 E2-50' Feet
Road, D1 D1-60' Feet Road, E3 E3-50' Feet Road which was approved by the
Director of Town and Country Planning, the First Respondent herein in DDP/
(C.N) No.1/ 91 dated 07.03.1991, the petitioners lands falls on for the purpose of
forming the E2 E2-50' Feet Road, D1 D1-60' Feet Road, E3 E3-50' 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 Hon'ble Court in
W.P.(MD) No.8515 of 2021 dated 25.06.2021 and in W.P.No.106 of 2022 dated
07.01.2022, and in W.P.No.22384/2023 dated 22.08.2023, and in W.P. No.32815/
2024 dated 14.02.2025 and in W.P.No.8787/2025 dated 25.03.2025.
For Petitioner : Mr.P.Tamilmani
For Respondents 1 & 2 : Mr.N.Naveen Kumar,
Government Advocate
For Respondent 3 : Mr.Abishek Murthy,
Standing Counsel
Page No.2 of 22
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 26/06/2025 03:46:52 pm )
W.P.No.15837 of 2025
ORDER
The petitioner has filed this petition seeking to declare that property
comprised in Old S.No.251, Old Ward F, Old Block No.9, Old T.S. No.7/2 and
New Ward F, New Block No.149, New T.S. No.4, of Mannarai Village, measuring
to an extent of acre 4.50 cents, situated at Mannarai Village, Tirupur North Taluk,
Tirupur District (property) is in forming part in Tiruppur Local Planning area-
detailed Development Plan-16 MAP No.4 for the purpose of forming the E2 E2 50
feet road, D1 D1-60 feet road, E3 E3-50 feet road which was approved by the
Director of Town and Country Planning the first respondent herein in DDP/ (C.N)
No.1/91 dated 07.03.1991 the petitioners lands falls on for the purpose of forming
the E2 E2-50 feet road, D1 D1-60 feet road, E3- E3-50 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 Honourable 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.22384/2023 dated 22.08.2023, W.P.No.32815/2024 dated 14.02.2025 and
in W.P.No.8787/2025 dated 25.03.2025.
2. The petitioner, M.N. Murugappa Girls Higher Secondary School
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 26/06/2025 03:46:52 pm )
Committee, owns 4.50 cents of land in Mannarai Village, Tirupur District, which
was part of a larger extent originally purchased in 1980 and later partially settled
for educational purposes. The subject land was reserved under the Tirupur Local
Planning Area - Detailed Development Plan-16 (DDP-16), approved in 1991, for
forming roads (E2, D1, E3). However, despite the passage of over three decades,
the authorities have not acquired the land as required under Section 37 of the
Tamil Nadu Town and Country Planning Act, 1971. As per Section 38 of the Act
and consistent judicial precedents, such reservation lapses if not acquired within
three years. The petitioner, now seeking to develop the land for educational use,
filed the present writ petition.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the aforesaid scheme
prepared in the year 1991, it was stated that the said land would be acquired by the
respondents as provided under the provision of Chapter IV of Town and Country
Planning Act, 1971 (herein after referred to as Act). However, the Government
had not taken any steps to acquire the land. It is also informed to the petitioner
that the proposal to form the road has not been given effect to or implemented. It
was also informed that under Section 25 of the Act, the Town Planning authority
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 26/06/2025 03:46:52 pm )
should have obtained approval from the Government within three years from the
date of the publication of the scheme but, they have not done so.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner had
made representation several times to the respondents to release the lands
belonging to him as the same is not acquired and no more public purpose is
involved under the deemed proviso viz., under Section 38 of the Act, land would
be deemed to be released from reservation, allotment or designation.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner would then place reliance on the
similar orders passed by this Court, which are as follows:
a) In the 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 dated 29.11.2024.
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
dated 12.12.2022.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 26/06/2025 03:46:52 pm )
c) In the case of M/s.C.Vasanthadevi and another Vs. The Secretary,
Housing and Urban Development Department, Fort St.George, Chennai - 600 015
and others in W.P.No.29069 of 2022 dated 12.12.2022.
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 dated 12.12.2022.
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 dated 12.12.2022.
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 dated
12.12.2022.
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 dated 25.01.2023.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 26/06/2025 03:46:52 pm )
6. Heard the learned counsel on either side and perused the materials
available on record.
7. The orders relied on by the learned counsel for the petitioner in the 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.''
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
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 26/06/2025 03:46:52 pm )
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, the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 26/06/2025 03:46:52 pm )
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.”
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 26/06/2025 03:46:52 pm )
c) In the case of M/s.C.Vasanthadevi and another Vs. The Secretary,
Housing and Urban Development Department, Fort 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
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 26/06/2025 03:46:52 pm )
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.
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
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 26/06/2025 03:46:52 pm )
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:
“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
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 26/06/2025 03:46:52 pm )
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.
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
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 26/06/2025 03:46:52 pm )
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:
“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
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 26/06/2025 03:46:52 pm )
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.
2. RM.Shanmuganathan v. Director of Town and Country
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 26/06/2025 03:46:52 pm )
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
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 26/06/2025 03:46:52 pm )
Floor, 807, Anna Salai, Chennai– 600 002 and others in W.P.No.31752 of
2022, which held as follows:
“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:
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 26/06/2025 03:46:52 pm )
“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 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
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 26/06/2025 03:46:52 pm )
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.”
8. In view of the plethora of decisions of this Court as had been quoted
above, the law is well settled in this regard as the issue raised in the writ petition is
no more res-integra. Once the three years period is lost within the meaning of
Section 37(2) proviso thereafter, Section 38 can very well be pressed in service
and ultimately, the land is deemed to be released from such reservation, allotment
or designation.
9. Therefore, in view of the legal provisions as well as the categorical
decisions made by this Court, this Court has no hesitation to hold that the
petitioner's land comprised in Old S.No.251, Old Ward F, Old Block No.9, Old
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 26/06/2025 03:46:52 pm )
T.S. No.7/2 and New Ward F, New Block No.149, New T.S.No.4, of Mannarai
Village, measuring to an extent of acre 4.50 cents, situated at Mannarai Village,
Tirupur North Taluk, Tirupur District, shall deemed to be released from such
reservation or allotment or designation under Section 38 of the Act.
10. With the above observation and direction, this writ petition stands
disposed of. No costs.
18.06.2025
(2/2)
vm /dsn
Index : Yes/No
Speaking Order : Yes/No
Neutral Citation : Yes/No
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 26/06/2025 03:46:52 pm )
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.Assistant Director,
Town & Country Planning,
Office of the District Town & Country Planning,
First Floor, Kumaran Commercial Complex,
Tirupur.
3.The Commissioner,
Tirupur Municipal Corporation,
Tirupur.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 26/06/2025 03:46:52 pm )
N.MALA,J.
vm/dsn
18.06.2025
(2/2)
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 26/06/2025 03:46:52 pm )
