NO.470 OF 1999 ANDW.P.M.P.NO. 12866 OF 2006 ...Hindustan Lever colonyResidents Welfare Association v. District Collector Kancheepuram District

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRASDATED : 7.06.2007CORAMTHE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE S.RAJESWARANWRIT PETITION NO.470 OF 1999ANDW.P.M.P.NO. 12866 OF 2006 ...Hindustan Lever colonyResidents Welfare Association,Regn.No.302/82rep. By its Secretary R.SundaramurthyC.19,Ist Main road, Door No.10,Hindustan Lever Company,Pammal, Chennai-75... PetitionerVs.1. District Collector Kancheepuram District, Kancheepuram.2. Executive Officer, Pammal Town Panchayat Pammal, chennai-75... RespondentsPetition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of Indiapraying for the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus as stated therein.For Petitioner : Mr.C.SelvarajSr.Advocate forM/s.S.ManiFor Respondents : Ms.V.Bhavani SubbarayanGovt.,Advocate for R.1 Mr.K.R.Tamilmani for R.2 O R D E RThis writ petition has been filed for the issue of a Writ ofMandamus directing the respondents not to interfere with theplaces reserved for the purpose of construction of community Halland developing Park in the approved Lay Out and to keep free fromencroachment by the members of the Panchayat Board in SurveyNo.24/21 and 24/22, Pammal Village, Saidapet Taluk. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

2. This writ petition has been filed by Hindustan LeverColony Residents Welfare Association. It is their case that theemployees working in Hindustan Lever Company formed a CooperativeSociety, purchased lands and formed lay out for their residentialpurposes in Survey Nos:20/2, 20/3, 21, 24, 24/2, 26 and 27/5 atPammal Village. In the approved lay out 9 grounds were reservedfor the construction of a Community Hall and a Park. TheAssociation submitted an application to the second respondent in1991 for construction of the Community Hall. Till date, it hasnot been approved and therefore the area is still lying vacant,which is protected by them with a fence. 3.According to the petitioner-association, the CouncilMembers who were holding the Office were trying to encroach thevacant lands and they sent a number of representations in thisregard. As no steps were taken, they have filed the above WritPetition for the aforesaid relief. 4. The respondents entered appearance and a counter affidavithas been filed by the second respondent, wherein it is stated asfollows:-"2. I submit that the lands in questionas per the approved lay out in LPM DTP 50/66revised in LPM DTP 37/67 meant for commonpurpose in about 10 grounds. The normalprocedure is to hand over the land to thelocal body by a gift deed by the promoter.Though the lands were taken over by the 2ndrespondent, no formal deed was executed by thepromoter. However during the year 1998 someof the members of the petitioner's associationwanted to usurp the lands meant for commonpurposes by way of a barbed fence but theofficials of the 2nd respondent thwarted theattempt by snatching the material meant forfencing. However, on a personalrepresentation by the Secretary to see that noone occupies the land in question, thematerials were returned to the Secretary on25.8.1998. Thereafter the Association startedhurling various abuses against the local bodyand the then councilors without any basis orfactual materials. 3. It is submitted that Government intheir G.O.(3D) No.13, Municipal Administrationand Water Supply Department dated 27.5.1999have accorded administrative approval forproviding Minimum Infrastructure Facilitiesfor extending Water Supply to Alandur and 11other adjacent Local Bodies including the 2ndrespondent Town Panchayat at a cost ofRs.28.54 crores and appointed ChennaiMetropolitan Water Supply And Sewerage Boardto construct a 10 Lac liters capacityunderground tank and pump house at Pammal and https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ laid conveyor main and feeder main for alength of 7450 liters to Pammal andAnakaputhur Town Panchayat at an estimatedcost of Rs.390 lakhs. For selection of sitefor the implementation of project theTechnical team from Chennai Metropolitan WaterSupply and Sewerage Board has inspectedvarious sites and finally concluded theiropinion to put up the above project on theland in question i.e., reserved for commonpurposes in the above lay out because of itssuitability and situation. Accordingly, thesubject matter was placed in its meeting on4.1.1999 at the Pammal Town Panchayat Counciland as per Resolution No.1 (one) the councilhas decided to place the above land at thedisposal of Chennai Metropolitan Water Supplyand Sewerage Board and thus unanimouslypassed the above Resolution. Then the councilapproved to seek financial assistance ofRs.357 lakhs of loan component and 21 lakhs ofgrant from Tamil Nadu Urban infrastructureFinancial Services Ltd., and the same wasdisbursed. Accordingly, the scheme wascompleted and regular water supply isundertaken to all the streets and individualhouses both in Pammal and AnakaputhurMunicipality. 4. it is submitted that after completionof the scheme for storage and supply of 10lakhs liters capacity of water undergroundtank, pump house and pumping system the entireland area has been completely safeguarded by apucca compound wall constructed by the secondrespondent. As on date, there is noencroachments. The land is fully utilised forthe public purpose of water supply and all thestreets and houses of the petitionerAssociation is happily drawing water from thescheme, among other streets in both Pammal andAnakaputhur Municipalities. 5. It is further submitted that the landis under the full control of this 2ndrespondent and is not used for any otherpurpose than the above public purpose. It isfurther undertaken by this respondent that noone would be allowed to encroach upon thelands by creating any private interest and theland will be preserved as it is as on date." 5. Heard Mr.C.Selvaraj, the learned Senior Counselappearing for the petitioner, the learned counsel appearing forthe second respondent and the learned Government Advocateappearing for the first respondent. I have also perused thedocuments filed in support of their submissions. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

6. In view of the averments contained in the counteraffidavit sworn to by Mr.M.Chandrasekarn, Executive Officer, I donot find any merits in this writ petition. 7.However, the petitioner-Association filed WPMP.No.12866 of2006 praying to amend the prayer. The petitioner-Association nowwanted the prayer of paying compensation to the Association forthe lands occupied by the second respondent in an area of 4367sq.ft., and also forbearing the respondents from interfering withthe places reserved for the purposes of construction of CommunityHall and developing Park in the approved lay out excluding thelands in which the underground tanks and pump house were put up bythe second respondent in an extent of 4367 sq.ft.,8. In effect, the new prayer sought to be introduced by thewrit petitioner is to pay a compensation for the lands occupied bythe second respondent in an area of 4367 sq.ft., apart from theoriginal prayer excluding the above said 4367 sq.ft., from theextent of 9 grounds, which were earmarked for Community Hall andPark. 9. Considering the fact that the lands in question meantfor a common purpose, it is not feasible to grant the originalprayer as well as the prayer now sought to be introduced. Insofaras the prayer for compensation is concerned, it is for thepetitioner-Association to prove that they are entitled tocompensation, that too, against the second respondent in anappropriate proceeding in an appropriate forum. Hence theamendment petition, namely, WPMP.No:12866 of 2006 is alsodismissed. 10. In the result, the Writ Petition and the WPMP.No:12866 of2006 are dismissed. No costs.sksSd/Asst.Registrar/true copy/Sub Asst.RegistrarTo1. District Collector, Kancheepuram District,Kancheepuram.2. Executive Officer,Pammal Town Panchayat,Pammal, chennai-75+ 1 cc to Mr. S. Mani, Advocate, SR No.32310+ 1 cc to Mr. R. Tamizhmani, Advocate, SR No.32152SSV(CO)SR/22.6.2007 orderin WP.No:470 of 1999