The Greater Chennai Corporation has come to the adverse notice of the Madras High Court for hurriedly sealing a building on the day when the court summoned its Commissioner to explain the mechanism in place to keep a check on buildings constructed in violation of approved building plans.
A Bench of Justices R. Subramanian and K. Kumaresh Babu said: “We are at a loss to understand as to what forced the Corporation which was sleeping like a Kumbakarna (mythological character) from 1997 till 2022 to ascend at the building on the very same evening we passed the order requiring the Commissioner’s appearance.”
The judges were seized of a writ petition related to a city building that was spread over 12,000 square feet though it had a sanctioned plan for only 5,000 square feet. They were of the view that such illegality could not have been possible without the collusion of the officers of the Corporation.
Therefore, on November 2, the Bench directed the Corporation Commissioner to be present in the court on November 4 to find out how the civic body keeps a check on unauthorised constructions since it appeared that the officials were not performing their duty satisfactorily.
However, in the afternoon session on November 2, the Corporation counsel pleaded with the court to dispense with the Commissioner’s appearance since he was busy with monsoon related relief work and sought permission to file an affidavit on November 4 explaining the procedures adopted by the Corporation.
The judges accepted the request. However, on November 3, the petitioner’s counsel complained to the court that about 10 officials from the Corporation, accompanied by police personnel, sealed the building on November 2.
The judges heard the matter on November 4 when the petitioner’s counsel told the court that one of the officials had claimed that it was because of the petitioner, the court summoned an IAS officer and therefore he must be taught a lesson. The counsel produced the audio recording.
Taking serious note of such an act, the judges directed the counsel to handover the video as well as audio recordings to the Registrar (Information Technology-cum-Statistics) of the High Court so that they could be preserved. They called for the names of the officials and the police personnel who had sealed the premises.
When it was represented on behalf of the Corporation that it was also in possession of three hours of video footage related to the sealing process, the judges wondered why did it take so long to seal the premises. “According to us, the very sealing process is a measure adopted by the Corporation to threaten the petitioner,” they said.
After taking note that an application for regularisation of the construction was pending and that the petitioner had undertaken to stop using the building for non-residential purpose within 15 days, the judges directed the officials to unseal all floors except the third floor which had been constructed in total violation of the sanctioned plan.
The case has been listed on Monday.
