S SUNDAR Vs. SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present writ petitions are directed against the impugned orders passed by the fist respondent / the Secretary to Government, Housing and Urban Development Department, Chennai, vide G.O. (2D) No.78, Housing and Urban Development (UD2(1) Department, dated 04.05.2016, and G.O. (2D) No.77, Housing and Urban Development (UD2(1) Department, dated 04.05.2016, respectively, in and by which, the petitioners were removed from the services of the respondent on the ground that they have caused huge financial loss of Rs.10,31,07,750/- in collecting Infrastructure and Basic Amenities charges relating to construction of Multi-Storeyed Building (Club House and Information Centre) at Tiruporur Panchayat Union, while they were working as Supervisor and Assistant Director of Town and Country Planning respectively in the respondent department.

(2.) Assailing the impugned order, Mr.R.Venkataraman, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner in W.P.No.30043 of 2016, pleaded that while the petitioner was serving as Supervisor / Draughtsman-II, one applicant made a proposal for construction of Multi-storeyed Building (Club House and Information Centre) at Thiruporur Panchayat Union, Navalur Village, Chengalpattu Taluk, the said proposal was technically approved by the Commissioner of Town and Country Planning vide Roc.No.26842/07BA2, dated 10.03.2008, and forwarded the proposal to the Mamallapuram Local Planning Authority (MLPA) and the said MLPA, in its 110th meeting held on 29.05.2008 as subject No.4, dealt with the said aspect and approved the proposal of the said applicant subject to a condition that the OSR (Open Space Reservation) should be handed over to the local body as insisted by the Directorate of Town and Country Planning (DTCP) and thereafter, the Member Secretary, MLPA, served a letter on the applicant on 05.06.2008 to comply with the special condition regarding handing over of the OSR to local body. However, the said condition was not complied with by the applicant. As the said condition was not complied with, the issue of non-compliance of the condition by the applicant was again discussed by the MLPA, in its 111th meeting held on 29.07.2008, whereby it was resolved not to issue any planning permission without the compliance report from the applicant with regard to special condition imposed in the letter dated 05.06.2008 by the MLPA.

(3.) In the meanwhile, the President of Confederation of Real Estate Developers' Association of India (CREDAI) has represented to the Government stating that since the levy of charges is over and above the development charges, which is collected under various other heads and that in other States the rates are much lower and that in view of higher rates of interest on home loans, the sales have also dipped, they have requested the Government to reduce the Infrastructure and Amenities charges for the various types of building and the said charges may be effective from 08.04.2008 and the same may be permitted to be paid in two installments. The said representation of the CREDAI is pending with the Government from the year 2008. In view of pendency of the said representation with the Government, like many other builders, the present applicant also awaited the result of the Government on the representation made by the CREDAI, without complying with the condition imposed by the MLPA.