Revised Minutes of the 48th Meeting of the Monitoring Committee Held on 04.01.2013
The Monitoring Committee of the Chennai Metropolitan Development Authority issued the Revised Minutes of the 48th Meeting of the Monitoring Committee held on 4 January 2013. This revised record documents the committee’s discussion of the 2012 regularisation scheme and its handling of appeals involving unauthorised or deviated buildings, including several recommendations to the Government to reject regularisation.
What the minutes cover
The Revised Minutes of the 48th Meeting of the Monitoring Committee record attendance, objections concerning building regularisation schemes, and decisions on individual appeal files. The Monitoring Committee of the Chennai Metropolitan Development Authority was overseeing the 1999 regularisation scheme under the High Court order dated 23 August 2006.
The minutes do not provide blanket regularisation for any building. They record recommendations and remarks on specific appeals, generally for consideration by the Government.
Who may be affected
The Revised Minutes of the 48th Meeting of the Monitoring Committee may matter to:
- Owners or applicants whose buildings and appeals are identified in the minutes.
- Buyers examining the approval or regularisation history of the listed properties.
- Professionals checking whether construction was shown to have been completed before 28 February 1999.
- Applicants relying on the 1999 regularisation scheme or seeking exemption under section 113-C of the Town and Country Planning Act.
Regularisation scheme discussion
The Revised Minutes of the 48th Meeting of the Monitoring Committee record disagreement about the 2012 regularisation scheme:
- Non-official members objected to extending the cut-off date from 27 July 1999 to 1 July 2007 and decided to seek directions from the High Court.
- Officials stated that section 113-C did not provide blanket relief and would not interfere with applications under the 1999 scheme.
- The stated limits included floor space index and setback violations not exceeding 50 per cent of the allowable limit, and road width violations not exceeding 20 per cent.
- Exemption was also linked to payment based on the violations, conformity with land use, required parking or qualifying nearby conditions within 250 metres, and adequate fire safety measures.
Appeal decisions recorded
The Monitoring Committee recommended rejection in several cases because applicants did not provide credible evidence that the whole building, relevant floors or blocks had been completed before 28 February 1999. Properties discussed included buildings on Bazullah Road, G.N. Chetty Road, Usman Road, Bangaru Naicken Street, East Abhiramapuram Second Street, Mudichur Road, Alagirisamy Street and Kavery Nagar, as well as Muthukumaran Institute of Technology.
Other reasons included encroachment onto an adjacent plot, construction after an earlier inspection, a later change of use, and the committee’s earlier position that an individual commercial flat could not be considered for regularisation. An appeal concerning a commercial building on Anna Salai was recorded as withdrawn after the Government accepted the applicant’s request.
This summary is generated from the source document to help you find what is relevant. The PDF above is authoritative. For advice on your own property, use LandLens One or speak to a qualified professional.
Common questions
Do these minutes regularise my building automatically?
No. The minutes state that section 113-C does not provide blanket relief, and the recorded appeal decisions are recommendations or remarks on individual files.
Why were several regularisation appeals recommended for rejection?
A repeated reason was the lack of credible evidence that the entire building, relevant floors or building blocks had been completed before 28 February 1999. Some cases also involved later construction, change of use or encroachment.
Can a buyer rely on the minutes as final approval for a listed property?
The minutes record the Monitoring Committee’s recommendations to the Government and the handling of particular appeals. They do not record blanket approval for the listed properties.
Did the 2012 exemption process replace the 1999 regularisation scheme?
The official explanation recorded in the minutes says that exemption under section 113-C would not interfere with 1999 regularisation applications and that the Monitoring Committee could continue under the High Court’s directions.
