In a significant order, the Madras High Court on Tuesday directed 31 officers, who include four IAS officers, to file affidavits explaining their inaction when illegal constructions were made during their period.
They should also state as to why the High Court should not recommend to the government disciplinary action against them.
The First Bench comprising Chief Justice M.Y. Eqbal and Justice T.S. Sivagnanam was passing further orders on writ petitions relating to illegal constructions.
It adjourned the case by four weeks on the assurance by the Advocate-General, A. Navaneethakrishnan, and the Chennai Corporation's counsel that they would continue their action in order to ensure full compliance of the court directions. The matter has been posted for further hearing on November 30.
When the writ petitions came up, in compliance of the court's order on October 12, the authorities, especially the CMDA had taken action against the builders and other persons who had unauthorisedly and illegally constructed multi-storied buildings.
A perusal of the affidavit filed by the Member-Secretary, CMDA, K. Phanindra Reddy, revealed that many buildings, which were unauthorisedly constructed, had been sealed and steps were being taken for demolishing the buildings.
The Advocate-General produced before the court an order of injunction issued by the XVI Assistant Judge, City Civil Court, Chennai, on Monday, in spite of the court being informed about the pendency of the present writ petitions and the orders passed on them by the High Court.
The Bench said “Prima facie, we are of the view that the learned Assistant Judge, who passed this order, has no fundamental knowledge of law in the matter of grant of injunction.”
The injunction order appeared to be in gross violation of the provisions of Code of Civil Procedure and also the Tamil Nadu Town and Country Planning Act.
In spite of the specific order by the Division bench that no civil court should entertain any suit or application in respect of the action taken by CMDA or the Corporation in respect of the illegal constructions and encroachments on roads and pavements, the Assistant Judge had entertained the suit and granted injunction. While entertaining any suit, the court ought to have considered the Division Bench judgment on August 23, 2006, and also the orders in the present writ petitions coupled with the provisions of the Tamil Nadu Town and Country Planning Act and the Code of Civil Procedure.
In the Division Bench judgment, the monitoring committee was directed to identify the officers of CMDA and the Corporation who were responsible for the failure to enforce planning laws and make appropriate recommendation for prosecution and/or disciplinary action.
The High Court, had by an order dated November 22 last year directed the Advocate-General to furnish the details of such officers, who were from time to time posted during that period, when all the illegal constructions had been made.
Following this, the Member-Secretary, CMDA, furnished a list of 31 officers. They included Md. Nasimuddin, M.R.Mohan, Vikram Kapur and Dayanand Kataria, all IAS officers. While the first three were former Member-Secretaries of CMDA, Mr. Kataria was the present Member-Secretary from April 1 last year. The other officers included three former Chief Planners.
The Bench ordered that the 31 officers be impleaded as party respondents in the writ petitions.
G. Rajagopalan, senior counsel for Rathna Stores Pvt. Ltd., T.Nagar, said the property had been purchased through court on as is where is condition. Hence, it could not be sealed.
The Bench said he could file a petition.
