HC direction to Local Planning Authrotity

Image
Press Trust of India Chennai
Last Updated : Oct 17 2016 | 6:32 PM IST
The Madras High Court today directed the Local Planning Authority of Thiruporur to file a site plan of the area with details about the different lands and the ownerships and as to what is permissible and impermissible in the Coastal Regulation Zone near Muttukadu.
The court issued the direction on a PIL by Anand J Danani of Singapore, a property owner of Sundarsehar Gardens of Muttukadu Village, seeking to restrain any persons from undertaking construction activity along the shoreline situated to the east by unknown persons.
According to the petitioner he held the property since 1990 and cultivating coconut trees and maintains a grove.
He said he had not carried out any construction activity and the entire gardens access to the beach through the road from the main entrance of the east coast road and it is used for decades by all the property owners.
Some persons were putting up compound wall immediately abutting the shoreline within about 25 meters away from the sea thereby demarcating a certain area for themselves.
He further submitted that some board was put up in Tamil at the entrance to the gardens claiming that the road was held by a private person and claiming he has patta and thus preventing access to the people to their properties and beach.
In the affidavit filed by the State Coastal Zone Management Authority and Director of Environment stated that as per the approved plan the site is falling in Coastal Regulatory Zone-III in the No-Development Zone and thus no constructions can be permitted within this zone except for repairs or re-construction of existing authorized structures.
The Local Planning Authority in its affidavit raised doubt over the claim of the petitioner.
The court directed the Local Planning Authority to file a site plan and said "We would like to have better clarity of the issue thus call upon the Local Planning Authority to file a site plan of the area setting out the different lands and the ownership and as to what is permissible and impermissible- whether it be of the petitioner or any others whoever may be carrying on construction.

Disclaimer: No Business Standard Journalist was involved in creation of this content

*Subscribe to Business Standard digital and get complimentary access to The New York Times

Smart Quarterly

₹900

3 Months

₹300/Month

SAVE 25%

Smart Essential

₹2,700

1 Year

₹225/Month

SAVE 46%
*Complimentary New York Times access for the 2nd year will be given after 12 months

Super Saver

₹3,900

2 Years

₹162/Month

Subscribe

Renews automatically, cancel anytime

Here’s what’s included in our digital subscription plans

Exclusive premium stories online

  • Over 30 premium stories daily, handpicked by our editors

Complimentary Access to The New York Times

  • News, Games, Cooking, Audio, Wirecutter & The Athletic

Business Standard Epaper

  • Digital replica of our daily newspaper — with options to read, save, and share

Curated Newsletters

  • Insights on markets, finance, politics, tech, and more delivered to your inbox

Market Analysis & Investment Insights

  • In-depth market analysis & insights with access to The Smart Investor

Archives

  • Repository of articles and publications dating back to 1997

Ad-free Reading

  • Uninterrupted reading experience with no advertisements

Seamless Access Across All Devices

  • Access Business Standard across devices — mobile, tablet, or PC, via web or app

More From This Section

First Published: Oct 17 2016 | 6:32 PM IST

Next Story