High Court of Madras Considers Writ Petition Challenging Panchayat Proceedings and Seeking Direction to Forward Land Use Change Application. The petitioner sought to quash the proceedings dated 25.04.2024 of the Panchayat Union President and to direct the application under Rule 4 of the Tamil Nadu Change of Land Use Rules, 2017 to be forwarded.

High Court: Madras High Court Bench: Principal
  • 1
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The writ petition was filed by Dr. Ramakrishnan, the owner of 6.31 acres of land at Modakkupatti Village, seeking to quash the proceedings of the President, Manmalai Panchayat Union, dated 25.04.2024, and for a direction to forward his application for conversion of agricultural land to non-agricultural purposes under Rule 4 of the Tamil Nadu Change of Land Use (From Agriculture to Non-Agriculture Purposes in Non-Planning Areas) Rules, 2017. The petitioner contended that he had obtained all necessary certificates, including no objection certificates from the Fire Service and Pollution Control Board, but the first respondent had not taken action on the application. Impleaded respondents 6 to 12, neighbouring land owners, objected on the ground that the conversion would affect agricultural activities in the locality and that the petitioner had not obtained prior approval from the Panchayat, District Collector, or Director of Town and Country Planning. The Special Government Pleader for respondents 3 to 5 opposed the petition, citing the procedures under Section 47A of the Tamil Nadu Town and Country Planning Act, 1971, and a relevant government order. The court was hearing the matter and had not yet pronounced its decision.

Issue of Consideration

Whether the proceedings of the first respondent dated 25.04.2024 refusing to forward the petitioner's application for change of land use under the Tamil Nadu Change of Land Use Rules, 2017 were valid and whether a direction should be issued to forward the application.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Case Details

2025 LawText (MAD) (02) 194

WP No. 28362 of 2024

2025-02-14

S. M. Subramaniam, K. Rajasekar

2025:MHC:721

Mr.S.Ilamvaludhi, Mr. B.Sanjay Balachnader for Mr.S.Yaswanth, M/s. S.Senthil, Mr.T.Chandrasekaran, Ms.A.Pramila

Dr. Ramakrishnan

1. The President, Manmalai Panchayat Union, Sentharapatti Post, Gingavalli Taluk, Salem District; 2. M.Bhuvaneshwari, Proprietrix, M/s.Kasren Bio-natural; 3. The District Collector, Salem; 4. The Assistant Director of Town Panchayates, Salem Region; 5. The Assistant Director of Town and Country Planning, Salem District; 6. K.Senthilkumar; 7. Meenakshi; 8. V.Avaranam; 9. R.Karthick @ Jayaprakash; 10. K.Mani; 11. S.Sellamuthu; 12. A.Suresh

Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more) Subscribe Now

Nature of Litigation

Writ petition seeking to quash proceedings of the Panchayat Union President and direction to forward land use change application

Remedy Sought

Quashing of the proceedings dated 25.04.2024 of the first respondent and a direction to forward the petitioner's application under Rule 4 of the Tamil Nadu Change of Land Use (From Agriculture to Non-Agriculture Purposes in Non-Planning Areas) Rules, 2017

Filing Reason

The petitioner's application for conversion of agricultural land to non-agricultural purposes was not acted upon by the first respondent despite submission of all necessary certificates.

Issues

Whether the proceedings of the first respondent dated 25.04.2024 are liable to be quashed Whether the first respondent should be directed to forward the petitioner's application under Rule 4 of the Tamil Nadu Change of Land Use Rules, 2017

Submissions/Arguments

The petitioner's counsel contended that the petitioner had obtained no objection certificates from the Fire Service and Pollution Control Board, yet no action was taken on the application. Impleaded respondents argued that the conversion would affect agricultural activities in the locality and that the petitioner had not obtained prior approval from the Panchayat, District Collector, or Director of Town and Country Planning. The Special Government Pleader opposed the petition, citing procedures under Section 47A of the Tamil Nadu Town and Country Planning Act, 1971, and a government order.

Judgment Excerpts

The proceedings of the 1st respondent/President, Manmalai Panchayat Union, Sentharapatti Post, Gingavalli Taluk, Salem District dated 25.04.2024 is sought to be assailed in the present writ petition. The petitioner states that he is the owner of the land measuring to an extent of 6.31 acres situated at Modakkupatti Village and has applied for conversion of agricultural land to non-agricultural purposes in non-planning areas. Mr.T.Chandrasekaran, learned Special Government Pleader appearing on behalf of the respondents 3 to 5 would oppose by stating that the procedures as contemplated under Section 47A of the Tamil Nadu Town and Country Planning Act, 1971, and the Government order passed in G.O.Ms.No...

Procedural History

The writ petition was filed. Respondents 3 to 5 were impleaded per order dated 04.10.2024. Respondents 6 to 12 were impleaded per order dated 14.02.2025 (the date of hearing).

Acts & Sections

  • Tamil Nadu Change of Land Use (From Agriculture to Non-Agriculture Purposes in Non-Planning Areas) Rules, 2017: Rule 4
  • Tamil Nadu Town and Country Planning Act, 1971: Section 47A
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Allows FERA Appeals Against Penalty for Irregular Release of Foreign Exchange by Full Fledged Money Changer. Show Cause Notice Held Vague for Not Specifying Which RBI Directions Were Violated.
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Allows Petition of Senior Clerk Challenging Transfer Order, Quashes Appellate Authority's Dismissal of Appeal for Non-Compliance with Natural Justice and Transfer Guidelines. The court held that the appellate authority's order was c...