V.SRINIVASAN vs THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR

W.P.No.35566 of 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
ORDERS RESERVED ON : 29.09.2026
ORDERS PRONOUNCED ON :26.10.2026
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY
W.P.No.35566 of 2023
and
W.M.P.Nos.35509 & 35510 of 2023 & W.M.P.Nos.8170 & 23744 of 2024
V.Srinivasan ... Petitioner
Vs.
1. The District Collector,
th
4 Floor, M.Singaravelar Maaligai,
No.62, Rajaji Salai,
Chennai – 600 001.
2. Berachah Apostolic Christian Assembly Trust,
Rep. by its Managing Trustee,
Ps.M.Maria Singarayar,
No.41, Anna Street,
K.K.Thazai,
M.M.C.Post, Madhavaram,
Chennai – 600 051.
3. The Superintendent Engineer,
Town Planning Department,
Greater Chennai Corporation,
Ripon Buildings,
Chennai – 600 003. ... Respondents
(R3 impleaded as per order dated 08.03.2024 in
W.M.P.No.6502 of 2024 in W.P.No.35566 of 2023)
1/14
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 26/10/2026 07:25:59 pm )

W.P.No.35566 of 2023
PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India
praying for issuance of a writ of certiorarified mandamus, to call for the records
pertaining the impugned proceedings of the first respondent herein dated
30.09.2023 in Proceedings Na.Ka.No.E2/9877/2023 and quash the same and
consequently, direct the first respondent herein to conduct proper enquiry
among the public residing in that area and pass fresh orders based on the
petitioner’s representation dated 28.11.2023.
For Petitioner : Mr.G.Karthikeyan, Senior Counsel
for Mr.A.Jagadeeswari
For Respondents : Mr.J.Chakkaravarthy
Additional Government Pleader for R1
Mr.B.Vijay
for Mr.G.Mohammed Aseef for R2
Ms.Vanitha Joyce Rani for R3
O R D E R
This writ petition is filed for a writ of certiorarified mandamus
calling for the records of the impugned proceedings of the first respondent
dated 30.09.2023, quash the same and consequently direct the first respondent
herein to conduct a proper inquiry among the public residing in the area and to
pass fresh orders based on the petitioner's representation dated 28.11.2023.
2. The petitioner states that the second respondent Church is near the
petitioner's house. Every day, between 200 and 300 people gather in the said
2/14
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 26/10/2026 07:25:59 pm )

W.P.No.35566 of 2023
Church, twice or thrice. On Sundays, the number is around 1,000. The Church
makes a great deal of noise, and the people living in and around it are severely
affected. Under the circumstances, the people in the vicinity lodged a
complaint with the Zonal Officer, Zone-III, Greater Chennai Corporation, who,
after considering the issue, issued a lock and seal notice to the Church under
Section 56(2) of the Tamil Nadu Town and Country Planning Act, 1971.
3. The second respondent Church challenged the notice dated
22.02.2018 in W.P.No.4573 of 2018. By an order dated 16.03.2018, the
authorities were directed to consider the statutory appeal filed by the Church
after affording an opportunity to the Church, and it was further ordered that till
the disposal of the appeal, no coercive steps shall be taken by the authorities.
Ultimately, by an order dated 26.04.2022, the appellate authority disposed of
the appeal filed by the second respondent Church and directed the Church to
obtain the necessary planning permission under the Tamil Nadu Combined
Development and Building Rules, 2019 within three months, failing which, the
Greater Chennai Corporation was permitted to pursue the necessary
enforcement action under the provisions of the Tamil Nadu Town and Country
Planning Act, 1971. The said authority extended the time by another three
months.
3/14
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 26/10/2026 07:25:59 pm )

W.P.No.35566 of 2023
4. Even thereafter, no action was taken, and hence the petitioner filed
W.P.No.18236 of 2023, praying for a writ of mandamus directing the
respondents 1 to 4 to demolish the illegal and unauthorised construction of the
Church. By an order dated 22.06.2023, the said writ petition was disposed of,
enabling the Church to carry out rectification work, with a direction that the
building be kept permanently locked and sealed. The connections and
amenities were to be extended only after the authorities were satisfied that the
building was in accordance with the plan. Subsequently, the second respondent
Church filed W.P.No.25514 of 2023, wherein this Court, by an order dated
06.11.2023, directed that the planning permission application filed by the
Church be scrutinized in accordance with law and that planning permission be
sanctioned. It is seen that the District Collector had given the No Objection
Certificate. The petitioner was not immediately given a copy of the said report
at the time of disposal of the above-mentioned writ petition. Subsequently,
after obtaining the copies, the petitioner filed the present writ petition.
5. The petitioner challenges the No Objection report on the ground
that its contents, as if they had inquired with the local people, are factually
incorrect. The petitioner has submitted affidavits from local residents stating
that the authorities never approached them. The persons mentioned in the
4/14
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 26/10/2026 07:25:59 pm )

W.P.No.35566 of 2023
report do not belong to the locality. All the people in the locality object to the
No Objection Certificate. The entire area cannot tolerate the noise pollution.
Due to the haphazard parking by the devotees of the Church, the entire area
will be jammed, and there will be no free movement of traffic. Therefore, the
petitioner prays that the No Objection Certificate granted by the Collector in
the impugned proceedings dated 30.092023 be set aside.
6. The first respondent resists the writ petition by filing a counter
affidavit, bringing to the notice of this Court the earlier orders passed in W.P.
No.18236 of 2023 and W.P.No.25514 of 2023. It is submitted that the District
Collector issued the No Objection Certificate in accordance with the Tamil
Nadu Combined Development and Building Rules, 2019. It is stated that there
is a continuous legal battle between the petitioner herein and the Church, and
therefore, the writ petition is filed. The No Objection Certificate was issued
after considering the report received from the Commissioner of Police, Avadi
Commissionerate, with reference to the law and order and traffic.
7. The second respondent also have filed a counter affidavit. It is
their case that the property measuring 7,360 sq.ft was purchased through the
trust that administers the Church via a registered sale deed bearing Document
5/14
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 26/10/2026 07:25:59 pm )

W.P.No.35566 of 2023
Nos.7700 & 7731 of 2001, on the file of the Sub Registrar, Sembiam. The
structure was constructed in 2002. Meanwhile, the lock and seal notice was
issued in 2018. The Church filed an appeal against the same, and ultimately
this Court, by order dated 16.03.2018, directed the Government to consider the
appeal. In the appeal, the Government directed the Church to obtain planning
permission within three months. During this period, the Church applied to
demolish the existing building for rectification, and permission was granted for
the rectification work. On 30.03.2023, the Church applied for planning
permission, and pending approval, the District Collector duly issued the present
No Objection Certificate.
8. The Commissioner of Police, Avadi, also issued a No Objection
Certificate on 26.07.2023. During the hearing of the earlier Writ Petition
No.25514 of 2023, the Hon’ble Division Bench of this Court recorded that the
No Objection Certificate had been granted and that the petitioner was also a
party. After that, when the detailed order was passed, planning permission was
also granted. The impugned No Objection Certificate was issued after
enquiring with more than 50 families. Thus, there is no illegality in the
impugned No Objection Certificate.
6/14
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 26/10/2026 07:25:59 pm )

W.P.No.35566 of 2023
9. Mr G.Karthikeyan , learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of
the petitioner, would submit that while the Ganesh temple, which was in the
pathway, was ordered to be demolished on the representation of the second
respondent Church, the Church itself was illegally established without proper
planning permission. A lock and seal notice had been issued, and the writ
petition was disposed of with a direction to apply for planning permission. As
per the Tamil Nadu Combined Development and Building Rules, a No
Objection Certificate is a step in that direction that the first respondent, the
District Collector, must issue. For the said purpose, the first respondent is
required to conduct a detailed enquiry in the locality, carry out a site
inspection, and ascertain the grievances in this regard.
10. The learned Senior Counsel would rely upon the typed set of
papers containing 26 affidavits, which were filed on 29.09.2026 by people
living in the vicinity. They have all categorically stated that they were never
approached and that they are all opposed to the establishment of the Church.
Further, the noise pollution that will arise on account of the Church being
established would be unbearable. Parking will also be haphazard, throwing
traffic across the entire area out of gear. Therefore, the impugned No Objection
Certificate and the consequential planning permission are liable to be set aside.
7/14
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 26/10/2026 07:25:59 pm )

W.P.No.35566 of 2023
11. Mr J.Chakravarthy , learned Government Advocate appearing on
behalf of the first respondent, would submit that the second respondent Church
applied for building permission under the Tamil Nadu Combined Development
and Building Rules, and, with reference to the place of worship, the District
Collector had to consider and give no objection. The District Collector
followed the procedure and, after obtaining reports relating to traffic and law
and order and independently applying his mind, granted the No Objection
Certificate, on which planning permission was also granted, and the Church is
functioning peacefully.
12. Mr.B.Vijay , learned counsel appearing on behalf of the second
respondent, would submit that there is personal enmity between the petitioner
and the Church, as the petitioner was connected to the unauthorized temple that
was put up, blocking the pathway. On a pétition by the Church, upon finding
that it was an encroachment on the public road, it was removed. Therefore,
only to wreak vengeance, and without any connection whatsoever, the
petitioner continues to file these writ petitions. The Division Bench of this
Court has considered the entire issue in detail and passed orders. The allegation
relating to noise pollution is unfounded, as the Church does not use any high-
decibel or cone speakers, and no noise pollution can arise from the proceedings
8/14
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 26/10/2026 07:25:59 pm )

W.P.No.35566 of 2023
conducted in the Church, as the same will be heard only inside the Church and
not outside. Ample parking is available for about 20 four-wheelers and more
than 50 two-wheelers, and the parking is not on the road. There is no traffic
jam or complaint. The petitioner's grievance is unfounded. The affidavits are all
from persons interested in the petitioner.
13. I have considered the rival submissions made on either side and
perused the material records of the case.
14. Firstly, with reference to locus standi, it cannot be held that the
petitioner is a totally unconnected person, inasmuch as there has been an
inter se dispute between the petitioner and the Church. The Church claimed to
be a connected person and filed petitions with reference to the illegal Ganesh
temple built in the vicinity. Similarly, persons connected with the Ganesh
temple in the vicinity can also complain about violations regarding the Church.
This cannot be dismissed on the ground that they are wreaking vengeance. This
Court will see whether the Church is functioning as per the Development
Control Rules.
9/14
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 26/10/2026 07:25:59 pm )

W.P.No.35566 of 2023
15. However, this is not the first round of litigation between the
parties. The parties have been engaged in protracted litigation, and in the earlier
round, the Division Bench passed a detailed order in W.P.No.25514 of 2023. It
can be seen that the petitioner herein was the fourth respondent in the said
petition. After hearing the parties, the Division Bench recorded a finding that
the Church had duly applied for a demolition plan and that permission had been
granted. Thereafter, it applied for building plan approval. As per the norms, the
Commissioner of Police, Avadi and the District Collector, Chennai, had issued
a No Objection Certificate for the construction of the Church. Thereafter, it
directed the authorities to scrutinize the planning permission and to sanction
the same. It can be seen that the order was passed as early as 06.11.2023.
16. Now, the only ground of attack is that the No Objection
Certificate has been issued without a proper inquiry. In this regard, when the
Church is situated in an urban setting, in a densely populated area, the
Collector receives a report from the appropriate authorities and, after a local
enquiry, grants no objection. It cannot be from the same persons whom the
petitioner may consider as living in the same locality. Innumerable persons live
in the same locality, and the petitioner has obtained affidavits from 26 such
10/14
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 26/10/2026 07:25:59 pm )

W.P.No.35566 of 2023
persons. That by itself would not render the local enquiry conducted by the
Collector redundant.
17. The grievance that is entertainable is twofold. Regarding noise
pollution, an undertaking has been given that no cone speakers or loudspeakers
will be used to broadcast the entire Church proceedings, and the same is
recorded. As far as the parking complaint is concerned, it is submitted that the
Church has ample parking space. Therefore, the jurisdictional police authorities
can only periodically check whether there is any violation of parking
instructions or whether there is any noise pollution beyond the permissible
decibel level. Except for that, when the Church has demolished the deviation
portion and reconstructed the Church in accordance with the permission and
subsequently, when due planning permission is also granted, now belatedly,
once again the No Objection granted by the District Collector, which is part of
the process of granting planning permission, cannot be faulted. As per the
statutory mandate, the District Collector has made an enquiry. I am not in a
position to hold that the same is absolutely unfair or causes any hindrance to
the public, so as to accept the submission now made by the learned Senior
Counsel for the petitioner and to quash the No Objection itself. The local
11/14
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 26/10/2026 07:25:59 pm )

W.P.No.35566 of 2023
authorities shall periodically check for violations relating to noise pollution or
illegal parking.
18. Accordingly, the prayer to quash the impugned proceedings
cannot be countenanced, and the Writ Petition stands disposed of with the
observations made supra . No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous
petitions stand closed.
26.10.2026
vji
Neutral citation : No
12/14
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 26/10/2026 07:25:59 pm )

W.P.No.35566 of 2023
To
1. The District Collector,
th
4 Floor, M.Singaravelar Maaligai,
No.62, Rajaji Salai,
Chennai – 600 001.
2. The Superintendent Engineer,
Town Planning Department,
Greater Chennai Corporation,
Ripon Buildings,
Chennai – 600 003.
13/14
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 26/10/2026 07:25:59 pm )

W.P.No.35566 of 2023
D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY, J.
vji
Pre-Delivery Order made in
W.P.No.35566 of 2023
and
W.M.P.Nos.35509 & 35510 of 2022 &
W.M.P.Nos.8170 & 23744 of 2024
26.10.2026
14/14
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 26/10/2026 07:25:59 pm )