Assistant engineer rapped for allowing illegal construction

The Madras High Court has directed the Assistant Engineer, Zone 16, of the city, to file an affidavit explaining as to why disciplinary proceedings should not be recommended against him for allowing an unauthorised construction to progress to first floor level despite issuing a stop work notice.

The matter relates to an unauthorised construction on a temple land in Peravallur. 

The construction has been progressing without any planning permission. 

Worst is, the construction has encroached an 80-feet road by at least 30 feet. 

The petitioner Samykutti had contended that besides the numerous encroachments on the 80-feet wide road reducing its width by at least 15 feet, an unauthorised construction on a temple land had encroached the road by almost 30 feet. 

He further noted that the encroachment posed a grave traffic problem on the road in the area. 

Despite several complaints and pleas, the officials have turned a blind eye to such gross violations, the petitioner stated. 

The first bench comprising Chief Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul and Justice R Mahadevan, said “A representation is stated to have been made by the petitioner on June 13, 2016 and the officer claims to have inspected the site and stop work notice was issued on July 20, 2016, at which stage the construction was only at the foundation stage. The photographs now show that the construction has reached the completion of first floor.” 

The bench on finding from M Ramesh, Assistant Engineer, present in the court, that he has been working in Zone 16 for the past three years and recording his submission that the 80 feet road is clear of any construction, said “We call upon the officer to file an affidavit as to what action he had taken to stall the unauthorised construction on the temple land and why shouldn’t disciplinary proceedings be recommended against him for dereliction of duty.” Directing the assistant engineer of the Chennai Corporation to file the affidavit within two weeks, the first bench then listed the case for further hearing to December 13.