Begin typing your search...

    No construction within CRZ in Muttukadu

    The Madras High Court on Monday directed the Town and Country Planning Authority to ensure that no construction is allowed in the Muttukadu area, which falls under the Coastal Regulation Zone (CRZ).

    No construction within CRZ in Muttukadu
    X
    Madras High Court

    Chennai

    First bench comprising Chief Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul and Justice R Mahadevan, while dealing with a plea seeking to restrain a person from the blocking the road to the beach, also directed the Local Planning Authority of Thiruporur, Muttukadu, to file a site plan of the area setting out the different lands and the ownerships and as to what is permissible and not permissible within CRZ near Muttukadu. 

    The public interest litigation moved by Anand J Danani, a property owner of Sundarsehar Gardens had sought to restrain persons from undertaking any construction activity along the shoreline near Mutukadu. 

    The petitioner had contended that he has been cultivating coconut trees and maintaining a groove since 1990 and that he had not carried out any construction activity. But the access to his garden and the beach was through a road leading in from the main entrance of the East Coast Road and the same is being used for decades by all the property owners. 

    But notwithstanding this, some persons were putting up a compound wall immediately abutting the shoreline within about 25 metres from the sea thereby demarcating a certain area for themselves, he said. He also submitted that a signage in Tamil claims that the road is held by a private person and that he has patta for the same including the road. 

    However, the State Coastal Zone Management Authority in its affidavit claimed that as per the approved plan the site in question in Mutukadu Village falls within the CRZ III. This means that the said site is within 200 metres from HTL of the sea and hence no constructions can be allowed within the zone barring repairs and reconstruction of existing authorised structures. 

    Further, with the local planning authority raising doubts over the petitioner claim, the bench sought for the map of the area to ascertain the exact position. 

    Visit news.dtnext.in to explore our interactive epaper!

    Download the DT Next app for more exciting features!

    Click here for iOS

    Click here for Android

    migrator
    Next Story