![]() Online edition of India's National Newspaper Thursday, May 01, 2008 ePaper | Mobile/PDA Version |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Tamil Nadu |
![]() |
News:
ePaper |
Front Page |
National |
Tamil Nadu |
Andhra Pradesh |
Karnataka |
Kerala |
New Delhi |
Other States |
International |
Opinion |
Business |
Sport |
Miscellaneous |
Engagements |
Advts: Retail Plus | Classifieds | Jobs | Obituary |
Tamil Nadu
-
Chennai
CHENNAI: The Madras High Court on Wednesday said the inspection carried out by the authorities in Kodanadu Estate in May last year was illegal and not supported by the Tamil Nadu Panchayat Rules. The rules framed under the Panchayats Act were not followed and hence the report could not be relied upon for any further action, the court said. Allowing three writ petitions filed by R. Ravichandran, Manager of the estate in Kothagiri Taluk in The Nilgiris district, Justice K. Chandru said the so-called inspection on May 31, 2007, conducted not only by the executive authority but by a wide range of officers drawn from other departments without specifying the purpose, clearly showed certain command performance from the higher-ups and it was not based upon any legal requirement under the buildings rules. Mr. Justice Chandru said as the show-cause notice dated June 5, 2007 sent by the Panchayat president was not based on any credible material, it was clearly illegal and should be set aside. The notice informed the details of the structures in the estate as per the inspection and said in respect of hill areas for any construction beyond 300 square metres, permission should be obtained from the Hill Area Conservation Authority (HACA) and prior to that the plan should be submitted to the Architectural and Aesthetics Aspects (AAA) committee. Only after getting plan approval with recommendation from the committee concerned, proposal should be sent in terms of Rule 4 of the Tamil Nadu Panchayat Building Rules. Only after getting the building licence, construction could be started as per the rules. The court said a notice issued on September 10, 2007 emanated from non-application of mind and it was vitiated by bias and deserved to be set aside. The notice inasmuch as it included buildings, which were not opposed to the Tamil Nadu Panchayat Building Rules, but taken note of for issuance of a provisional order to direct the owner to demolish those buildings also. Mr. Justice Chandru set aside the inspection report. However, holding that Rule 4 (1) (d) of the Tamil Nadu Panchayats Buildings Rules was constitutionally valid, he dismissed another writ petition filed by the estate.
Printer friendly
page
News:
ePaper |
Front Page |
National |
Tamil Nadu |
Andhra Pradesh |
Karnataka |
Kerala |
New Delhi |
Other States |
International |
Opinion |
Business |
Sport |
Miscellaneous |
Engagements |
|
|
|
The Hindu Group: Home | About Us | Copyright | Archives | Contacts | Subscription Group Sites: The Hindu | The Hindu ePaper | Business Line | Business Line ePaper | Sportstar | Frontline | Publications | eBooks | Images | Home |
Copyright © 2008, The
Hindu. Republication or redissemination of the contents of
this screen are expressly prohibited without the written consent of
The Hindu
|