Land Reserved For Public Purpose Land In Approved Layout Vests With Local Authority; Conversion To Residential Plots Impermissible: Madras High Court

The High Court was considering a Petition challenging the final show cause notice issued by the Commissioner, Coimbatore Corporation, asking the petitioner to vacate and hand over the encroached portion of the public purpose land as per the approved layout, failing which, he would be evicted from the subject property.

The Division Bench of Justice S. M. Subramaniam and Justice K. Surender held, “Public purpose land, including OSR street in an approved layout and its maintenance and protection are settled by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in the case of Association of Vasanth Apartment’s Owners Vs V. Gopinanth And Others. All the public purpose lands are to be protected for the benefit of the public in a layout. Conversion of public purpose land into residential plots is impermissible.”

“In respect of public purpose land in an approved layout, land vests with the local authority”, it added.

Senior Counsel PVS. Giridhar represented the Petitioner, while Standing Counsel Najeeb Usman Khan represented the Respondent.

Arguments

It was the case of the petitioner that the respondents had issued the impugned notice based on the judgment, which was confirmed by the Supreme Court. In the said civil proceedings, the petitioner’s land was not included in the suit schedule property, and thus, according to the petitioner, the Corporation ought not to have issued the impugned notice. The petitioner contended that he cannot be construed as an encroacher, as he was a purchaser of the plot.

It was the Respondent’s case that, as per the approved layout, only 86 residential plots were approved, and Plots A and B were reserved for public purposes. The petitioner has been in occupation of Plot No. 87(A), which is reserved for public purposes.

Reasoning

On a perusal of the approved layout, which was approved by the erstwhile Coimbatore Municipality, the Bench noted that only 86 residential plots were approved. The Bench also took note of the respondent’s submission that the public purpose area was converted into residential plots, and a few persons had encroached upon the same. “The said layout has been approved in the year 1971. That apart, the purchase of public purpose land is null and void”, it added.

The Bench stated, “This Court is of the considered view that civil rights between the parties need not be decided by the High Court in a writ proceedings under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

It was further noticed that another similarly placed person, who had purchased the common purpose area, instituted a civil suit. The matter went up to the Supreme Court, and issues were decided in favour of the Corporation. Considering that all those persons were evicted from the common purpose area and the impugned final show cause notice was issued for the petitioner, the Bench stated, “Mere show cause notice would provide no cause for instituion of writ proceedings.”

Considering that the petitioner stated that he is a bona fide purchaser and such purchase occurred on account of misrepresentation, the Bench held that the remedy would lie against the vendor.

Granting two weeks’ time to the petitioner to submit further explanation to the respondent Corporation, the Bench dismissed the petition and ordered, “On receipt of any such representation, the same may be considered by the respondent Corporation, and thereafter, they shall proceed with enforcement action, if the subject portion of the land under the occupation of the petitioner is a common purpose area.”

Cause Title: V.Yasodaa v. The Commissioner (Neutral Citation: 2026:MHC:1189)

Appearance

Petitioner: Senior Counsel PVS.Giridhar, M/s.PVS.Giridhar Associates

Respondent: Standing Counsel Najeeb Usman Khan

Click here to read/download Order