B.Nirmala v. The Secretary to Government,

ORDER The petitioner challenges the communication dated 08.10.2025 issued by the second respondent rejecting the petitioner's application for regularisation of an unapproved layout formed in Survey Nos. 26/2, 28/1B, 31/1, 32 (Part), 32/2

(Part), 34, 35/1, 35/2, 36/1, 43/1, 44/2, 44/3, 55, 56/1B, 56/2B, 57/1A1, 57/1B, 65/1, 65/2, 65/3, 66/1A, 66/1B and 67/1 & 2 of Vellavedu Village.

¶2The petitioner claims to be the owner of the above lands. During the years 2013–2014, the petitioner formed an unapproved residential layout known as "Sri Prasanna Vinayagar Nagar" and sold 44 plots measuring about 49,735 sq.ft. in the year 2014. Page3 of 6

¶3According to the petitioner, the Tamil Nadu Housing Board proposed to form an approach road for the Thirumazhisai Satellite Town Scheme. Thereafter, the second respondent issued a press notification dated 14.02.2024 inviting applications for regularisation of unapproved plots and layouts, fixing

29.02.2024 as the last date for submission of applications. The petitioner submitted an application along with the prescribed fee on 19.02.2025. The third respondent inspected the layout and forwarded a proposal recommending regularisation and approval of the unsold plots. However, the application was rejected on the ground that a draft notification had been issued under Section 39-I of the Tamil Nadu Town and Country Planning Act, reserving the subject lands for the Land Pooling Area Development Scheme relating to the Thirumazhisai Satellite Town Project. Aggrieved by the rejection, the present writ petition has been filed.

¶4Heard the learned counsel on either side and perused the materials available on record.

¶5It is not in dispute that a draft notification under Section 39-I of the Act was published on 02.04.2025. This was followed by a declaration under Section 39-A of the Act proposing to include the subject lands in the Land Pooling Area Development Scheme. Under Section 39-I, the appropriate planning authority is required to prepare and publish the draft scheme along with the draft regulations within nine months from the date of the declaration under Section 39-A. The Page4 of 6 second proviso to Section 39-I empowers the Government to extend this period by a further six months. In the present case, the period was extended from

02.01.2026 to 30.06.2026.

¶6Admittedly, the extended period has also expired and no further extension has been granted. Therefore, as on date, there is no legal impediment preventing the second respondent from considering the petitioner's application for regularisation of the unapproved layout.

¶7In view of the above, the impugned communication dated 08.10.2025 is liable to be set aside. Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed and the impugned order is quashed. The second respondent is directed to reconsider the petitioner's application for regularisation of the unapproved layout afresh and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law. If the petitioner satisfies all the other statutory requirements, the application shall be considered for approval. The above exercise shall be completed within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petitions are closed. There shall be no order as to costs. 14-07-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order ak Page5 of 6 To

¶1The Secretary to Government, Housing and Urban Development Department, Fort St.George, Chennai -09.

¶2The Member Secretary, Chennai Metropolitan Development Authority, Egmore,Chennai -08.

¶3The Commissioner, Poonamallee Panchyat Union, Poonamallee, Chennai. WPoNo.o6501oofo2026 HEMANToCHANDANGOUDAR,oJ. ak WPoNo.o6501oofo2026 14-07-2026 Page6oofo6

Page1 of 6 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 14-07-2026 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR and WMP.Nos. 7077 and 7078 of 2026 1. B.Nirmala 2. B.Kasthuri, 3. B.Radhika, 4. B.AmuthaPriya, 5. B.Anitha, 6. B.Ambika, 7. B.Bhanumathi, 8. D.Loganathan, 9. K.Raja, ..Petitioners Vs 1. The Secretary to Government, Housing and Urban Development Department, Fort St.George, Chennai -09. 2. The Member Secretary, Chennai Metropolitan Development Authority, Egmore,Chennai -08. 3. The Commissioner, Poonamallee Panchyat Union, Poonamallee Chennai. ….Respondents Page2 of 6 Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India, praying for issuance of writ of certiorarified mandamus, calling for the records of the 2nd respondent in connection with the impugned order passed by him in Letter No. Reg.Layout/1442/2025 dated 08.10.2025 and to quash the same and to direct the respondents to grant approval for the layout namely Sri Prasanna Vinayagar Nagar, situated at Vellavedu Village,Thiruvallur District by considering the Petitioner application for regularisation within a reasonable time fixed by this Court. For Petitioners: Mr.S.Sivakumar For Respondents: Mr.M.Sivavarthanan, Govt.Counsel-R1 & R3 Mr.B. Sanjay Balachandar, Standing Counsel-R3