Violator asked to foot the bill for removing unauthorised structure

November 28, 2016 01:11 am | Updated September 13, 2017 12:34 pm IST - CHENNAI:

Taking a strong view of an individual who did not comply with its orders to dismantle a unauthorised construction, the Madras High Court has directed him to pay the money spent by the Chennai Metropolitan Development Authority (CMDA) for removing the structure.

“Public money should not be expended for the benefit of people who carry out the illegalities..,” the First Bench comprising Chief Justice S.K. Kaul and Justice R. Mahadevan said and further directed the individual respondent to remit the money within 15 days of the order.

The completion certificate would be issued only after the unauthorised constructions were cleared and the amount paid, the judges said.

During the hearing of the case filed by petitioner B. Mohamed Hussain Alikhan, it came to light that despite the opportunity given to the individual respondent, C. Naresh, on September 9 this year, he failed to comply fully and only some part of the unauthorised construction was removed, when the CMDA officials checked on November 3.

Taking action

On November 17 and 18, the CMDA Enforcement Cell demolished the ground floor structures of two dwelling units to convert the ground floor into a stilt floor car parking area.

The counsel for the respondent said that every brick, which was unauthorised, would be removed.

“We take the aforesaid statement on record, making it clear that no portion of the building, including the authorised portion shall be occupied till every brick of unauthorised construction is removed and a completion certificate obtained,” the High Court bench said.

In view of the directions passed and subject to their compliances and further deposit of costs by the respondent of Rs. 10,000 with the Mediation and Conciliation Centre, Madras High Court Campus, “we desist from initiating proceedings of contempt, making it clear that the same would be the consequence for any non-compliance now,” the bench said and further posted the case for compliance on February 3 next year.

Petitioner B. Mohamed Hussain Alikhan sought for a direction to the CMDA to take suitable action against the individual respondent for his illegal acts and initiate proceedings against him for disobeying the High Court order.

0 / 0
Sign in to unlock member-only benefits!
  • Access 10 free stories every month
  • Save stories to read later
  • Access to comment on every story
  • Sign-up/manage your newsletter subscriptions with a single click
  • Get notified by email for early access to discounts & offers on our products
Sign in

Comments

Comments have to be in English, and in full sentences. They cannot be abusive or personal. Please abide by our community guidelines for posting your comments.

We have migrated to a new commenting platform. If you are already a registered user of The Hindu and logged in, you may continue to engage with our articles. If you do not have an account please register and login to post comments. Users can access their older comments by logging into their accounts on Vuukle.