(Prayer: Writ petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India for issuance of writ of Mandamus directing the respondents - 1 and 2 to take action to demolish the illegal constructions put up the by the Respondents -3 to 17 in basement floor (Non-FST area) of the buildings known as “Baid Metha Complex” in New Door No.16, Old No.183, Anna Salai, Chennai, within a time frame to be fixed by this Hon’ble Court.)

Dr. Anita Sumanth, J.

1. The present Writ Petition has been filed by the President of the Mount Garden Flat owners and Residents Welfare Association. The prayer is for a mandamus directing the Chennai Metropolitan Development Authority/R1 and the Commissioner, Greater Chennai Corporation/R2 to take action to demolish the alleged illegal construction put up by R3/C.L. Baid Metha Trust (in short ‘Trust’), R4/Tamil Nadu Housing and Leasing Company (P) Ltd., R5/C.L.Baid Metha Foundation Trust and R6 to R17, being owners and occupants of the property known as ‘Baid Metha Complex’ in New Door No.16, Old No.183, Anna Salai, Chennai (‘property’/’property in question’) within the time frame fixed by this Court and consequently direct R1 and R2 to handover the premises to the petitioner Association.

2. The trajectory that this matter has taken involves a reference to mediation by Hon’ble Mr.Justice N.Kirubakaran, which, unfortunately, has failed. The parties are hence back to Court and pursuing the matter adversarially.

3. We also find that there is some history to the matter insofar as, early as in 2015, W.P.No.14395 of 2015 was filed by C.L.Baid Metha Trust, i.e., R3 in this Writ Petition, arraying Secretary to Government, Housing and Urban Development Department and Member Secretary, Chennai Metropolitan Development Authority, Chennai as R1 and R2 respectively.

4. The prayer in that Writ Petition was for a mandamus directing the respondents to consider and pass orders on the representation dated 29.04.2015 seeking removal of lock and seal affixed on the basement floor in all three blocks in the property in question, so as to enable the Trust to rectify the admitted deviations in the basement floor and bring the same in conformity with the sanctioned plan dated 23.09.1992.

5. In that Writ Petition, a Contempt Petition bearing No.843 of 2015 has been filed by the Baid Mehta Complex Residents Welfare Association, which is a Resident Association, different from the petitioner Association. The Writ Petition and the Contempt Petition have been disposed by order dated 09.06.2015 in the following terms:

               This writ petition is filed seeking a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to consider and pass orders on the representation dated 29.04.2015 for removal of the lock and seal affixed on 28.04.2015 to the basement floor in all the 3 blocks at New No.16, Old No.183, Anna Salai, Little Mount, Saidapet, Chennai 600 015, so as to enable the petitioner to rectify the deviation in the basement floor and bring the same in conformity with the sanctioned plan accorded by the second respondent vide P.P.A. Letter No.B1/182/92 dated 23.09.1992, within a reasonable time.

               2 Today, when the matter is taken up for hearing, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that having lost at every forum, including the appeal preferred under Section 80-A of the Tamil Nadu Town and Country Planning Act, 1971 in respect of the property in question, wherein, the authorities had recorded the deviations and illegal constructions, the petitioner seeks a direction from this Court to permit it to remove the deviations and also the illegal structures and to restore the same to their original position as per the approved plan.

               3 The learned Standing Counsel appearing for the second respondent-Chennai Metropolitan Development Authority submits that the petitioner will be granted four weeks time after de- sealing and unlocking the premises, for removal of deviations and illegal structure and thereafter, the authorities will have proper inspection and if it is found that the same is not done in accordance with the approved plan, the second respondent be permitted to lock and seal the same.

               4 Accordingly, we dispose of the writ petition permitting the petitioner to take necessary steps for making good the defects in the structure. If deviations are not rectified and also illegal structures are not removed within the time, as aforestated, the authorities are competent to take steps immediately to seal and lock the premises and thereafter, take consequential action as required under the provisions of law. Costs made easy. Connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.

               5 In view of the disposal of the aforesaid writ petition, nothing survives for adjudication in Contempt Petition No.843 of 2015. Accordingly, the Contempt Petition stands closed.

6. The petitioner is aggrieved as, despite the direction at paragraph 4 of the above order, nothing has been done by the Trust thus far. In fact, a sub- application bearing No.40 of 2016 in Contempt Petition SR.No.2154 of 2016 had been filed by the Baid Mehta Complex Residents Welfare Association seeking grant of leave to file a Contempt Petition against the Chennai Metropolitan Development Authority for disobeying order dated 09.06.2015.

               The Sub-Application was disposed denying grant of leave in the following terms:

               ‘2. Learned Additional Advocate General appearing for the respondent submits that pursuant to the order of this Court dated 09.06.2015, a portion of the building, which is authorised, has been locked and sealed on 08.10.2015 as the writ petitioner-Trust viz., C.L.Baid Mehta Trust failed to comply with its undertaking to remove the illegal structure and rectify the same within the specified time. He has further submitted that the said portion will be put into disuse by filling up the area with sand or otherwise.

               3. In view of the aforestated submission made by the learned Additional Advocate General, no leave is required to be granted. Accordingly, this sub application is disposed of.’

7. We are given to understand that there is yet another Resident Association also, which has not engaged in any litigation thus far.

8. In view of the tortured history, as narrated above and also being acutely conscious of the scope and ambit of Writ of Mandamus, we are of the considered view that the prayer sought for by the petitioner cannot be considered by this Court. It is for the petitioner to take appropriate steps based on the order of this Court dated 09.06.2015. In fact, the petitioner does not even appear to have approached the authorities to trigger action as per the order of this Court dated 09.06.2015, which is the proper course of action to have been taken.

9. Hence, we decline the grant of mandamus but leave it open to the petitioner and other Associations, if they are so inclined, to approach the authorities for appropriate action to be taken in view of order dated 09.06.2015, or other remedial measures as available to them under the concerned enactments/Rules, in accordance with law.

10. This Writ Petition is disposed as above. No costs.