‘Corpn can take suo motu action on illegal structures’

Holding that the Additional Secretary (Technical), Housing and Urban Development Department, in the impugned order had taken note of the grounds raised by the petitioner, Abitha Banu, a division bench comprising Justice M Sathyanarayanan and Justice N Seshsayee said, “The authority has rightly exercised its jurisdiction strictly in accordance with law under Section 80-A of the Tamil Nadu Town and Country Planning (TCP) Act. Therefore, this court is not inclined to interfere with the order in exercise of its jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.”

The petitioner was issued the de-occupation notice by the Executive Engineer, Corporation of Chennai, Zone 8, that pointed out that the residential building at Door No 113, Periya Pathai West Street, Arumbakkam, Chennai, was a wholly unauthorised structure.

Challenging the notice, the petitioner filed an appeal under Section 80-A of the TCP Act, which was rejected by the Housing and Urban Development Department that the ground floor plus first floor constructed in the premises was totally unauthorised, and quashed it on the basis that there was no merit in the appeal. This led to the present petition at the High Court.

The counsel appearing for the petitioner cited certain suits pending against the property, and argued that it was not open to the Corporation to issue de-occupation notice. However, the bench dismissed the plea holding that the pendency of the civil suit and dismissal of earlier suits had no bearing on the action being initiated by the civic body against the unauthorised construction, as they are provided withstatutory powers to do so under the provisions of the Chennai City Municipal Corporation Act, 1919.