MUTHU GANESH Vs. COMMISSIONER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PRAYER in the writ petitions are to issue a writ of certiorarifed mandamus calling for the records of the respondent made in Notice Nos. 0108, 0106, 0112, 0118, 0110, 0117 and 0115, respectively, dated 14. 12. 2004, issued under Section 378 of The Chennai City Municipal Corporation Act IV of 1919 and to quash the same and forbearing the respondent from taking any further proceedings of demolition consequent to the Impugned Notice Nos. 0108, 0106, 0112, 0118, 0110, 0117 and 0115, dated 14. 12. 2004.

(2.) THESE are all the matters relating to demolition of superstructure at Door Number New No. 14, Old No. 15/11 Vembuliamman Koil Street, Virugambakkam. It is to be noted that this court by order dated 15. 03. 2004 in W. P. No. 6147 of 2004 directed the Member Secretary,cmda; The Commissioner, Corporation of Chennai; District Collector, Chennai; and Tahsildar, Mambalam Guindy Taluk; to take action on the unauthorised construction. Following the said order, the respondent has issued notice under section 256 (1) and (2) to the owners of the property viz. , Mr. Subbiah and Mr. Ethiraj. Thereafter, the respondent has passed an order of demolition under section 256 (3) of The Chennai City Municipal Corporation Act, 1919. Section 256 (1), (2) and (3) reads as follows:

(3.) IT is seen from the above said section that the respondent herein can issue notice only to the owner or to the builder. It is pertinent to mention that all the petitioners before me are neither the owner nor builder, but tenants, who are all in occupation of the said premises. After exercising section 256 the respondent has chosen to execute the work of demolition. Hence the respondent has caused notice under section 378 of the said Act. Section 378 of the Act reads as follows: