Mandatory removal under a town planning scheme can be enforced by mandamus across the entire scheme area.

A town planning statute and the governing scheme may impose a mandatory duty on the local authority to remove huts, sheds, stables and other structures that contravene the scheme. That duty extends to the whole area covered by the scheme, not merely to land vested in the corporation. Because the obligation is statutory and not discretionary, mandamus is an appropriate remedy to compel performance. The later enactment was treated as consistent with, and confirmatory of, this construction. Alleged conduct of the plot owners was not accepted as a sufficient basis to deny relief, although the operative direction was confined to structures offending the scheme.

---

---

Issues: Whether the municipal corporation, as the local authority under the Town Planning Act, was under a statutory duty to remove huts, sheds, stables and other temporary structures on private final plots if they contravened the town planning scheme; and whether mandamus could properly issue directing performance of that duty.

Analysis: The scheme and the Act were read as a complete statutory framework for the preparation and implementation of town planning. The final scheme had statutory force, and the relevant provisions empowered the local authority to evict persons occupying land contrary to the scheme and to remove, pull down or alter any building or work contravening the scheme. The court treated the scheme's regulations and notes as supplementing the Act, and held that the obligation to clear offending structures extended across the whole area covered by the scheme, not merely land vested in the corporation. The later enactment was also considered and found to contain corresponding provisions that confirmed rather than displaced this construction. Since the duty was imposed by statute and was not discretionary, mandamus was an appropriate remedy. No sufficient ground was shown to refuse relief on the basis of alleged conduct of the plot owners.

Conclusion: The corporation was bound to remove structures that contravened the scheme, and the writ of mandamus was justified.

Final Conclusion: The appeal failed, with only a narrowing of the wording of the operative direction so that removal was confined to structures offending the scheme.

Ratio Decidendi: Where a town planning statute and scheme impose a mandatory duty on the local authority to remove structures that contravene the scheme, that duty may be enforced by mandamus and extends to the entire area governed by the scheme.

---