Building violation case: Three department chiefs told to appear in Madras HC

A division bench comprising Justice N Kirubakran and Justice Krishnan Ramasamy was passing interim orders on a case wherein while approval was obtained for the construction of a basement, stilt (part) and ground plus three floors, the building owner had put up additional three floors unauthorisedly. Following a string of litigations by the neighbour and the owner even approaching the Supreme Court, the unauthorised three floors were directed to be demolished.

But notwithstanding this, the owner failing to rectify the deviation in the remaining three floors in terms of floor area, setbacks had resorted to usage violation and used the building commercially for conducting marriage, birthday functions and as prayer hall.

Following this, the High Court directed the officials of CMDA and Corporation of Chennai to keep the building under lock and seal and directed the Electricity Board to disconnect power supply to the premises. However, a submission by the petitioner’s counsel T Mohan stated that electricity supply has been provided to the premises even without issuance of completion certificate by the CMDA contrary to the direction given by the division bench of this court.

On citing the order, which held that electricity, water connection and occupation should be contingent only on the building being certified that it has been constructed in compliance with the planning permit and other applicable laws, Justice Kirubakaran impleaded the Tangedco Chairman into the case and directed him to explain as to how power supply was effected to the premises in question without the issuance of completion certificate.

Further, Justice Kirubakaran on recording the submissions that the enforcement wing of the CMDA failed to have enough staff to oversee the constructions, said “It is seen that almost all the buildings are constructed with impunity without even approved plan and even if there is an approved plan, there are deviations. This is a classic example wherein every part of the building is in deviation of the approved plan. It is highly improbable that a six-storied building could come up overnight.”

“Hence, the member secretary, CMDA and the senior planner of enforcement wing are directed to appear before the court to apprise this court of availability of manpower, vacancy position and manpower requirement in view of extension of the jurisdiction of the CMDA.” Also, noting about the lethargic attitude of the Corporation, which is no better than the CMDA and the petitioner counsel’s submission about the number of prevailing vacancies, Justice Kirubakaran directed the Corporation Commissioner to appear before it on the next hearing date about the vacancy details to enable the court pass a comprehensive order.”