SOUTHERN ASSOCIATES Vs. CHENNAI METROPOLITAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS writ petition is filed by the petitioner who is having a factory at Plot No.C-28, Mugappair Industrial Estate (East), Padi, Chennai. In this writ petition, they have challenged a notice issued by the Tamil Nadu Housing Board published in Daily Thanthi newspaper on 15.07.2012 insofar as it relates to Plot No.6/CS/6A measuring to an extent of 4341 sq.ft. and for a consequential direction forbearing the respondents from selling the said plot for commercial use.

(2.) IT is seen from the records that the petitioner earlier came to this court with a writ petition being W.P.No.15788 of 2001 seeking to challenge an order passed by the Tamil Nadu Small Industries Development Corporation, dated 4.5.2001 and after setting aside the same sought for a direction to the respondents to allot a suitable additional industrial site in Ambattur Industrial Estate within the CMDA limit at the rate prevailing in the year 1986 so as to enable the petitioner to relocate his Drop Hammer machine and to run the same. This court had disposed of the said writ petition on 25.6.2010. In that writ petition, it was found that the petitioner had no difficulty in running the unit in Plot No.C-28. In respect of generation of noise, he was directed to maintain the same within the norms prescribed by the IIT. If he does not violate the same, there was no difficulty in running the unit. It was stated that the petitioner's request to allot an additional plot or some other plot is not within the power of the court. But, however it is left to the TNHB to consider its request. This court cannot compel them to part with any land. Therefore, the relief claimed by the petitioner was denied.

(3.) ACCORDING to the petitioner, bringing the property for auction as commercial plot was totally illegal. The entire row of plots in C-24 to C-29 were allotted for industries involving generation of heat and noise. The attempt by the housing board to allot the adjacent plot as a commercial plot was highly arbitrary. The petitioner's industry is a forging unit involving generation of heat of more than 950 CC. It is the bounden duty to provide a buffer zone. The genuine attempt made by the petitioner seeking allotment of the adjacent plot right from the year 1991 has been thwarted by the respondents. Insisting that the petitioner should pay the commercial rate is only improper.