M.DHANARAJAN Vs. COMMISSIONER, TIRUVERKADU MUNICIPALITY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner has come forward to file this writ petition seeking a direction to the first respondent to cancel the plan approved as early as 21.09.2011 by the first respondent in favour of respondents 2 and 3.

(2.) Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the approval ought not to have been granted in favour of respondents 2 and 3. The order passed in the earlier writ petition will not stand in the way of the petitioner getting appropriate relief. Therefore, the writ petition will have to be allowed.

(3.) Learned counsel appearing for the first respondent submitted that admittedly even according to the petitioner, there is an approved plan pursuant to which respondents 2 and 3 have put up construction. That is the reason why, prayer has been sought for to cancel it. Unless the petitioner demonstrates before the appropriate authority within the time granted, such a relief cannot be granted. The earlier writ petition filed by the petitioner was disposed of on 05.12.2018 giving liberty to the petitioner to challenge the approval granted in favour of respondents 2 and 3. Even now, the petitioner has not challenged the approval granted except seeking mandamus to cancel it especially when the writ petition was permitted to be withdrawn to assail the Government Order also.