RAJA RAJESWARI NAGAR RESIDENTSASSOCIATION, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY DHARMARAJ JACOB, RAJA RAJESWARI NAGAR, PALAYAMKOTTAI Vs. GOVERNMENT OF TAMIL NADU,REP. BY ITS SECRETARY,MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION ANDWATER SUPPLY DEPARTMENT,FORT ST. GEORGE, MADRAS,

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner/Association has filed the above writ petition seeking to issue a writ of certiorari, calling for the records of the first respondent in its proceedings in G.O. Ms.(T) No.115, dated 22 -6 -1994 and quash the same.

(2.) The petitioner is an Association registered under the Societies Registration Act at Raja Rajeswari Nagar, Palayamkottai. The Power Agents of the original owners of lands, who are the respondents 4 and 5, applied to the third respondent/Municipal Corporation for permission to form an approved residential lay -out. The third respondent, with the concurrence of the second respondent, approved the lay -outs bearing L.P/R(TK)20/85 and L.P/R(TK)15/86. As a condition for approving the lay -outs, the second respondent directed the promoters, namely, the respondents 4 and 5 to hand over the public areas such as parks and other open space earmarked for public purpose to the third respondent/Municipal Corporation as per the Tamil Nadu Town and Country Planning Act, 1971. Though the promoters were so directed, they did not do so. The third respondent did not take any step to recover the same. The members of the petitioner/Association had put up a park, playground for children, badminton court and a stage for community meetings. While so, the respondents 4 and 5 approached the first respondent for permission to put up a kalyana mandapam in the area earmarked as common open space in the approved lay -out of the Raja Rajeswari Nagar. The petitioner/Association caused a lawyer's notice to be issued to the third respondent requesting not to grant any such permission to the respondents 4 and 5. The third respondent, in his communication dated 8 -9 -1994, informed the petitioner that the first respondent had granted permission to the respondents 4 and 5 to put up a community mandapam in the open area of the approved lay -out of Raja Rajeswari Nagar. On a further enquiry, the petitioner/Association came to know that the first respondent, by way of the impugned order, granted permission to the respondents 4 and 5 to put a community hall in the open space area earmarked in the approved lay -out Nos.20/85 and 15/86 and that the impugned order of the first respondent is illegal and hence, the same is liable to be quashed.

(3.) In the counter affidavit filed by the second respondent, denying among other averments of the petitioner/Association, it is stated that as per the lay -out conditions, the roads in the lay -outs alone were handed over to the local body by means of a gift deed, but the park and the open space in the two lay -outs were not handed over to the local body, that according to the sanctioned plan, the applicant has to hand over the area reserved for road and park to the local body through the registered gift deed as per lay -out conditions, that there was a dias and a badminton court in the site under reference as stated by the petitioner, that on the application from the respondents 4 and 5, the first respondent issued the impugned order to convert 81 cents of land reserved already for public purpose in the lay -out Nos.20/85 and 15/86 into a community hall, that the extent of the converted land is 260' x 136', that the excess land of 71.20 cents available for public purpose should be handed over to the local body through a gift deed as per the Government Order, that the local body should permit the respondents 4 and 5 to construct the community hall only after obtaining from them the excess land of 71.20 cents through a gift deed, that the respondents 4 and 5 have not yet handed over the land to the local body and no approval was given to the owners of the land to construct the community hall, that the park and the open space do not vest with the local municipal authority as the same has not been gifted to the Municipality, that no notice was required to be served on anybody regarding the conversion of lay -out reservations, that Sec. 167(3) of the Tamil Nadu District Municipalities Act, 1920 stipulates that within 60 days after receipt of any application under sub -section (1), the Council, shall, either sanction the making of the street on such "conditions" as it may think fit or disallow it, or ask for further information with respect to it, that accordingly, a condition was enforced and that that the lay -out was approved in 1986 while the Tirunelveli was a Municipality and not Municipal Corporation.