Why Vijay govt’s move to empower CMDA must come with transparency checks
Senior IAS officers, urban planners, and Chennai realty leaders praise the intent but caution that structural changes to the approval mechanism alone won't suffice
In a move aimed at reducing red tape and boosting investment, the C Joseph Vijay government in Tamil Nadu has empowered the Chennai Metropolitan Development Authority (CMDA) to directly grant final planning permissions for high-rise buildings in the Chennai Metropolitan Area (CMA).
A Government Order (GO) issued on June 15 by the Housing and Urban Development Department eliminates the previous multi-layered process that required scrutiny by a High-Rise Building Committee followed by state government approval.
Fewer intermediaries, less time
The administrative reform is expected to reduce approval timelines from the current six or seven months to a matter of weeks, while keeping core building norms such as height limits and floor space index (FSI) unchanged.
Industry bodies such as CREDAI Tamil Nadu have welcomed it as a major step toward improving ease of doing business and attracting large-scale investments in IT, R&D, and commercial projects.
Under the earlier Tamil Nadu Combined Development and Building Rules (TNCDBR) 2019, high-rise proposals underwent field inspections and technical scrutiny by the CMDA, followed by referral to a scrutiny panel including experts from fire services, Tangedco, TWAD Board, and others. Recommendations then went to the state government for final approval.
This often led to delays, discretionary interventions, and opportunities for corruption.
Minimal human intervention
The new system reconstitutes the scrutiny panel and authorises the CMDA itself to grant or refuse permissions based on its recommendations, provided projects comply with development regulations. Vijay's directive focuses on minimising human intervention and procedural delays, experts noted.
Also read: A 'global city' is ambitious, but what Chennai needs may be vertical growth
The Federal spoke to senior IAS officers, urban planners, and experts familiar with the system. Many praised the intent but cautioned that structural changes alone won't suffice without addressing deep-rooted issues of transparency and accountability.
Urban development experts noted that while removing redundant layers is positive, the CMDA has increasingly functioned as little more than a body for checking setbacks and rubber-stamping files. A strong watchdog mechanism is essential to break the longstanding nexus between builders and officials.
Watchdog mechanism
Past inquiries, including those by the Justice Ragupathy and Justice Rajan committees, reportedly exposed illegal collusions through which officials bypassed regulations in exchange for favours. These reports were never made public, fuelling public distrust.
A senior IAS officer remarked: "A strong, independent oversight system is non-negotiable. Without it, reforms risk becoming superficial."
Experts and officials consulted by The Federal emphasised several transparency measures:
Full online publication of files: All CMDA files, including detailed returns, queries, rejections, and approvals, should be publicly uploaded. This would prevent inspecting officers from pressuring owners for bribes. Contact details of inspecting officers must be openly available.
Public access to NOCs and conditions: No Objection Certificates (NOCs) from departments such as PWD, Water Resources, HR&CE, Fire Services, Traffic Police, Airport Authority, and Environmental Clearance must be digitised and made public, along with all compliance conditions attached to approvals.
Read/Watch: 'Clean' image, pending probes: TVK faces its next big test
Streamlined decision-making: Approvals should carry the name of the Deputy Planner or Chief Planner, not just the Member Secretary (whose role some suggest abolishing or redefining). Currently, superintendents often sign on behalf of the Member Secretary. Reclassification of land should be handled transparently by the Member Secretary, similar to practices under the Town and Country Planning Director. This shouldn't have to be forwarded to higher authorities unless required. CMDA can forward summaries to the board or minister as needed.
Closing the compliance gap: In major projects, CMDA often imposes over 30 conditions. However, a significant gap exists between affected locals, activists, and authorities. Violations such as encroachments on water bodies that surface only during floods go unreported because citizens do not know whom to approach. Government agencies later blame builders, but proactive public dashboards could help.
Chennai's recurring floods highlight these failures. CAG reports and court observations have repeatedly criticised CMDA for allowing construction on or near water bodies, shrinking natural drains, and exacerbating inundation. Experts stress that post-approval monitoring and public complaint mechanisms are critical.
Traffic impact assessment: Traffic impact assessment remains a major pain point. For every commercial project (malls, schools, offices), mandatory Traffic Impact Studies should require developers to provide service roads within their own land, ensuring vehicles enter/exit via these without clogging main roads. Mall and school managements must allocate dedicated space for this purpose to ease Chennai's notorious congestion.
Also read: Centre mandates PNG for apartments, but Tamil Nadu is woefully behind
The latest reform signals the Vijay government's commitment to governance efficiency and anti-corruption drives, including the recent transfer of town planning officials.
However, as one expert summarised: "Speed without transparency is a recipe for chaos. Publish everything online, fix accountability at the planner level, empower citizens with information, and enforce conditions rigorously; only then will this reform deliver sustainable urban development."
