S. KUPPUSAMY Vs. DIRECTORATE, TOWN AND COUNTRY PLANNING

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Writ Petition has been filed for direction directing the Respondents 1 to 5 to forbear Respondents 6 & 7 to run the Poultry Farm situated at SF. No.256/2 in K Pudhupalayam, Kuttalambarai Village, Mohanur Taluk, Namakkal District.

(2.) The Petitioner owns Agricultural lands comprised in SF. Nos.140/4C B, 167/1A2-1A1, 167/5C2-5C1 in Madakasampatty Village and SF. Nos.308/2, 55/2A-A-B, 257/3A1-A2-B1-2 in Kuttalambarai illage in Mohanur Taluk, Namakkal District. For the said lands, the Petitioner was issued Patta and constructed house after obtaining Planning Permission to an extent of 1157 sq.ft. While being so, Respondents 6 & 7 are being neighbours, cultivating Agriculture crops in SF. No.256/2. They also started construction for Poultry Farms without obtaining necessary permission from the Government Authorities i.e. Planning Permission, No Objection Certificate, Licence and Consent from the Government Authorities for forming Poultry Farms. They failed to maintain hygienic atmosphere which is against Rules 32 & 34 of Tamil Nadu Panchayat Rules, 1997 and also against Tamil Nadu Panchayat Act, 1994. In fact, the Fifth Respondent issued Statutory Notice to the seventh Respondent and there by directed them to adhere Rules and Regulations by the proceedings dtd. 30/11/2022. However, the Respondents 6 & 7 failed to obey the Rules and continued with construction. After completion of the entire construction, they started to operate Poultry Farm by handling the birds in SF. No.256/2 which is abutting the Petitioner's Agricultural land. It was constructed without even maintaining the distance of 500 meters away from the residential area. They also caused nuisance due to odour and flies. They also violated the Rule that Poultry Farm should not be located within 100 meters from major Water course like rivers, lakes, canals and drinking water sources like wells, summer storage tanks. Therefore, the Petitioner submitted Representation to take appropriate action as against the Sixth & Seventh Respondents.

(3.) The learned Senior Counsel for the Petitioner would submit that as per the Sec. 2(1-A) of Tamil Nadu Panchayats Act, 1994 defines "building" includes a house, out-house, tent, stable, latrine, shed, hut, wall (other than a boundary wall not exceeding 2.5 metres in height) and any other such structure, whether of masonry, bricks, wood, mud, metal or any other materials whatsoever. It requires planning and building permission from the authority concerned. Sec. 257 of Tamil Nadu Panchayats Act, 1994 provides power, authority and Responsibilities of Panchayats. Accordingly, for constructions coming under Schedule-4 of Tamil Nadu Panchayats Act, the Government delegated power to the Fifth Respondent and responsibilities with respect to the preparation of Plans for Economic development and Social justice and also with such powers and authority as may be necessary to enable them to carry out the responsibilities conferred upon them. However, the Fifth Respondent failed to take appropriate action as against the Petitioner for illegal construction of Poultry Farm and to run the Poultry Farm without any Licence.