Case Note & Summary
The writ petition was filed by A.R. Balakrishnan seeking a mandamus to direct the Greater Chennai Corporation to demolish an unauthorized construction by the third respondent, R.V. Arul, on a 0.22 cents house site in Adambakkam, Chennai. The petitioner had complained on 27.06.2023, leading to inspections and enforcement actions. The Corporation issued a stop work notice on 31.07.2023, a lock and seal notice on 20.11.2023, and a de-occupation notice on 25.04.2024. The third respondent replied on 23.05.2024, citing pending civil litigation and a decree in his favor, and sought recall of the notice. The latest inspection on 19.02.2025 showed no further construction, and the third respondent requested time to regularize after court proceedings. The sole legal issue was whether the pendency of a civil dispute justified protection of unauthorized construction. The Court held that unauthorized construction cannot be allowed under any circumstances; every building requires plan approval, and the authority is empowered to demolish illegal structures. The mere pendency of a civil dispute is not a ground to escape consequences of an illegal act. Accordingly, the Court directed the Corporation to complete procedures and demolish the unauthorized construction within eight weeks. The writ petition was disposed of with no costs.
Headnote
A) Municipal Law - Unauthorised Construction - Demolition Despite Pending Civil Dispute - Tamil Nadu Town and Country Planning Act, 1971, Sections 56, 57, 85, 49 - The petitioner sought demolition of unauthorised construction by the third respondent on a 0.22 cents plot. The Corporation had issued stop work notice, lock and seal notice, and de-occupation notice under the Act. The third respondent argued that a pending civil suit and a decree in his favor should prevent demolition. Held, unauthorised construction cannot be allowed irrespective of pending civil litigation; the competent authority is bound to demolish illegal construction. The Corporation was directed to complete enforcement procedures and demolish the unauthorised structure within eight weeks. (Paras 5-8)
Issue of Consideration
Whether a writ of mandamus can be issued to direct the demolition of unauthorised construction when a civil dispute between the parties is pending before a civil court.
Final Decision
The writ petition is disposed of with directions to respondents 1 and 2 to complete the procedures as expeditiously as possible and demolish the unauthorised construction put up by the 3rd respondent within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of the order. No costs.
Law Points
- Legal points not extracted
- unauthorised construction cannot be allowed without building plan approval
- competent authority empowered to initiate enforcement action under Tamil Nadu Town and Country Planning Act
- 1971
- mere pendency of civil dispute is not a ground to protect unauthorised construction
- lock and seal and de-occupation notices under Sections 56
- 57
- 85 of the Act are mandatory enforcement steps
