Corruption, inaction made Chennai concrete jungle, causing flooding: Madras HC
Despite the court issuing several orders, the authorities of Greater Chennai Corporation and other local bodies were “absolutely insensitive” towards constructions violating building plan approvals, said a vacation bench of Justice SM Subramaniam and Justice V Lakshminarayanan. Because of such violations that are going on unchecked, Chennai was facing flooding during the rainy seasons, it added.
CHENNAI: Inaction, omission, and corrupt activities of the authorities concerned have led to large-scale violations of building construction in Chennai, which in turn has resulted in the city becoming a concrete jungle and also flooding during rains, criticised the Madras High Court.
Despite the court issuing several orders, the authorities of Greater Chennai Corporation and other local bodies were “absolutely insensitive” towards constructions violating building plan approvals, said a vacation bench of Justice SM Subramaniam and Justice V Lakshminarayanan. Because of such violations that are going on unchecked, Chennai was facing flooding during the rainy seasons, it added.
“The authorities are expected to implement the law in 'stricto sensu' [in the strict sense] instead of assisting the violators by not initiating appropriate timely action. Inaction, omission, and corrupt activities of the authorities are causing not only inconvenience to the people at large but it also violates the constitutional rights of citizens,” the bench said.
The bench made these scathing observations while hearing a petition moved by K Shanthi of Chennai, who sought a direction to the Housing and Urban Development Department to consider her representation challenging the lock and seal, and demolition order issued against her property.
According to her, the Directorate of Town and Country Planning and the Greater Chennai Corporation issued notices to lock and seal her property alleging it was constructed violating the statutes. Aggrieved by the order dated November 26, she moved a revision petition before the Housing and Urban Development Department. As no action was initiated regarding her representation, she moved the High Court.