Patna High Court - Orders
The Patna Municipal Corporation vs The State Of Bihar on 12 July, 2023
Author: Rajiv Roy
Bench: Rajiv Roy
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.10698 of 2019
======================================================
1. The Patna Municipal Corporation through its Municipal Commissioner,
Mauryalok Complex, Police Station- Kotwali, District- Patna.
2. The Municipal Commissioner, Patna Municipal Corporation, MauryaLok
Complex, Police Station- Kotwali, District- Patna.
3. The Vigilance Officer, Patna Municipal Corporation, MauryaLok Complex,
Police Station- Kotwali, District- Patna.
4. The Executive Engineer, New Capital Region, Patna Municipal Corporation,
MauryaLok Complex, Police Station- Kotwali, District- Patna.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Urban Development
Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.
2. The Municipal Building Tribunal, Patna through its Chairman, Patna.
3. The Chairman, The Municipal Building Tribunal Patna.
4. The General Manager, PESU, South Bihar Electric Distribution Company
Limited, Patna.
5. M/s Panchdeep Construction Limited, K.P. Mall, North of Aashiyana Plaza,
Budha Marg, Post Office- GPO, Police Station- Kotwali, District- Patna
through its authorized signatory Sri Ram Ratan Chaudhary, Sri Anjan Sinha,
Son of Late Awadhesh Kumar Prasad Sinha, Resident of 2C, Sidhi Vinayak
Plaza, R.K. Bhattacharya Road, Post Office- GPO, Police Station- Gandhi
Maidan, District- Patna.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Manoj Kumar, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Yogesh, AC to SC 9
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY
ORAL ORDER
5 12-07-2023Heard Mr. Manoj Kumar representing Mr. Pankaj Kumar for the Patna Municipal Corporation (henceforth for short 'the PMC'), as also Mr. Yogesh, AC to SC 9.
The PMC has challenged the order dated 13.02.2019 passed in Appeal No. 113 of 2014 by Municipal Building Tribunal-1, Bihar, Patna by which the order dated Patna High Court CWJC No.10698 of 2019(5) dt.12-07-2023 2/8 19.01.2014 passed in Vigilance Case No. 12A of 2013 by the learned Municipal Commissioner, Patna has been set aside with observation.
As per the writ petition, 'the PMC' initiated Vigilance Case No. 12A of 2013 against the Respondent No. 5, M/s Panchdeep Construction Limited on the basis of Inspection Report dated 14.12.2012 with further direction to stop construction.
Subsequently, the inspection was done, report came, the gross violation of building code was found and thereafter putting the Respondent No. 5 on show cause and perusing the reply, an order was passed on 19.11.2014 (Annexure 3 to the writ petition) by which the following order was passed:-
bl laca/k esa lh0MCyw0ts0lh0 la0& 8152@2013 esa fnukad 13-03-2014 dks ikfjr vkns"k fuEu izdkj gS%& We direct that unless an order of the Corporation has been upset modified or annulled by a Court of law, it has to be an must be enforced under all circumstances as a facet of the rule of law.
pw¡fd izfroknh ,d izksQs"kuy fcYMj gS ftlds QeZ dk uke iapnhi daLVªD"ku fy0 gS ftlds izca/kd jke jru pkS/kjh ,oa ikoj vkWQ ,VkWuh gksYMj dh vatu flUgk gS] ftuds }kjk ekStk& vjjk E;wfufliy losZ IykWV la0& 114] 204 lhV la0& 10 cq)ekxZ esa vofLFkr iqjkuk v"kksd flusek dEikm.M dks fodflr fd;k tkrk jgk gSA muls bl izdkj dh mEehn ugha dh tk ldrh gS fd "kkWfiax ekWy de eYVhIysDl ds fy, okafNr Hkw[k.M dh pkSM+kbZ u jgus ds ckotwn Hkh fucaf/kr okLrqfon ls Lohd`fr izkIr dj Patna High Court CWJC No.10698 of 2019(5) dt.12-07-2023 3/8 fuekZ.k dk;Z djsaxsA Li'Vr% iw.kZ fopyu tkucw> dj fd;k x;k gSA mijksDr foospuk ,oa Hkou mi fof/k ds izko/kku ls izfroknh ds fuekZ.kk/khu Hkou esa lkeus vofLFkr oÙkZeku dh lM+d ¼¶ykbZ vksHkj lfgr rhu [kaMks esa foHkDr½] Hkw[kaM dh pkSM+kbZ rFkk okguksa ds Free flow movement esa vojks/k ds fcUnq ij&
1) Multiplex dh vuqefr ugha nh tk ldrh gSA
2) ifjlj ds lkeus Flyover ds dkj.k rhu ikVZl esa MhokbZM gSA okLro esa tc okLrqfon us uD"kk ikfjr fd;k ml le; Hkh Flyover ekStwn FkkA
3) okLrqfon }kjk Lohd`r fd;s ;s uD"ks esa okguksa ds ikfdZax ds fy, ikfdZax x.kuk dh xM+cM+h ik;h x;h gSA vr% iw.kZ vko";d ekfdZax dk izko/kku vko";d gSA bl izdkj okLrqfon jeu dqekj fuca/ku la0& 47@2009 ds }kjk Lohd`r Iyku dsl la0& PMC/Arara (C) 7-151/ 10 fnukad& 12-07-2010 dh Lohd`fr dks Hkou dks fofu;eu dh dafMdk&11 ,oa ch0vkj0Mh0,0 ,DV 1981 dh /kkjk 38 lgifBr /kkjk 488 fcgkj uxjikfydk vf/kfu;e] 2007 ds rgr jÌ fd;k tkrk gS] rnuqlkj fuEu vkns"k ikfjr fd;k tkrk gS%&
1) izfroknh dks vkns"k fn;k tkrk gS fd u;k uD"kk cuok;s] tks Hkou mifof/k ,oa PRDA/ fcgkj ljdkj }kjk uD"kk ikfjr gksus dh frfFk ds fnu izHkkoh funsZ"kksa ds vuqdwy gks ,oa ikfdZx rFkk okguksa ds vkokxeu dh leqfpr O;oLFkk gksA 2½ l{ke izkf/kdkj ls la"kksf/kr uD"kk ikfjr gksus ij gh dksbZ fuekZ.k fd;k tk ldsxkA bl fufer izfroknh dks rhu ekg dk le; fn;k tkrk gSA u;s izLrkfor uD"ks esa Multiplex dk izko/kku ugha gks ldrk gS ,oa xSj vkoklh; mi;ksx ¼tSlk fd Iykfuax fjiksVZ esa vafdr gks½ ds vuqlkj gh vuqefr nh tk ldrh gSA 3½ izfroknh ;fn pkgs rks uD"kk bl izdkj ikfjr djk;sa tks mifof/k ds vuqdwy gks ,oa Hkou dks U;wure rksM+uk iM+s A 4½ izfroknh dks ;g Hkh vkns"k fn;k tkrk gS fd iz"uxr fuekZ.k esa os dksbZ Third party interest create ugha djsaxsA 5½ fctyh dusD"ku] ;fn ifjlj esa gS rks th-,e-] islw lqfuf"pr djsaxs fd ifjlj esa fo|qr laca/k&foPNsnu Patna High Court CWJC No.10698 of 2019(5) dt.12-07-2023 4/8 (Disconnect) 7 fnuksa ds vanj dj nsa rFkk Hkfo'; esa fcuk vkns"k ds dusD"ku ugha nsaA 6½ ftyk voj fuca/kd] iVuk lqfuf"pr djsaxs fd iz"uxr Hkw[k.M ij fufeZr Hkou ds fdlh va"k dk fuca/ku ugha djsa A 7½ funs"kd] "kgjh ;kstuk dks funs"k fn;k tkrk gS fd os fucaf/kr okLrqfon jeu dqekj fuca/ku la0& 47@09 ij Hkou mifof/k ds izfrdwy uD"kk Lohd`fr ij dkj.ki`PNk djrs gq;s vyx ls dkjZokbZ djkuk lqfuf"pr djsa A 8½ Fkkuk v/;{k dksrokyh dh ;g ftEesokjh (Responsibility) gksxh fd os mDr ifjlj esa dksbZ fuekZ.k u gksus nsa A ;fn gksrk gS rks vius Lo;a ds c;ku ij izkFkfedh ntZ djsa A 9½ dk;Zikyd inkf/kdkjh] uwru jkt/kkuh vapy ,oa dk;Zikyd vfHk;ark] uwru jkt/kkuh ize.My ¼m0½ la;qDr :i ls funsf"kr gS fd mDr ifjlj esa uxjh; lqfo/kk ds rgr lhoj] okVj lIykbZ] Mªsust dh lqfo/kk bUgsa eqgS;k ugha dh tk; A bl vkns"k dh izfr ftykf/kdkjh] iVuk] ojh;
iqfyl v/kh{kd] iVuk] izca/k funs"kd] nf{k.k fcgkj fctyh forj.k daiuh fyfeVsM] iVuk] ftyk voj fuca/kd] iVuk] dk;Zikyd inkf/kdkjh] uwru jkt/kkuh vapy] dk;Zikyd vfHk;ark] uwru jkt/kkjh izeaMy ¼m0½ ,o lacaf/kr Fkkuk v/;{k dks vko";d dkjZokbZ gsrq izsf'krA ;fn izfroknh pkgas rks bl vkns"k ds fo:) Hkou vihyh; izkf/kdj.k esa lle; vihy nk;j dj ldrs gSA vkns"k dh izfr lHkh lacaf/kr i{kksa dks Hkst nsa A ys[kkfir ,oa la"kksf/kr g0@& vLi'V g0@& vLi'V uxj vk;qDr 1 9@11@14 uxj vk;qDrA** Aggrieved, the Respondent No. 5 moved before the Municipal Building Tribunal-1, Bihar, Patna in Appeal No. 113 of 2014.
Patna High Court CWJC No.10698 of 2019(5) dt.12-07-2023 5/8 The main argument of the Respondent No. 5 before 'the Tribunal' was that the basis for which the order has been passed by 'the PMC' i.e. the notification no.-3/Pra-Niti-01/06- 517 dated 16.06.2006 was never published in official gazette and thus it was not known to them.
The plea of 'the PMC' was that the same was published in official gazette and as such, the claim of the Respondent No. 5 was without any basis.
Accordingly, as per the Appellate Court's order, the lawyer concerned, chose to use the provisions of Right to Information Act on 20.02.2016 in which from the Government Printing Press, Gulzarbagh an information vide memo no. 327 dated 08.03.2016 was received stating that the notification no.- 3/Pra-Niti-01/06-517 was not received for publication in the official gazette in the Government Printing Press, Gulzarbagh.
Taking into account the aforesaid facts, 'the Tribunal' on 13.02.2019 passed the following order:-
"On perusal of the records as well as considering the submissions of the parties in present facts and circumstances and after discussion about all applicable law following order is being passed ----
(a) To cancel the sanction map under provision of clause-11.1 of building bye laws is not Patna High Court CWJC No.10698 of 2019(5) dt.12-07-2023 6/8 sustainable in the eye of laws and therefore set aside .
(b) The measurement/comparison on the basis of Notification no. 3/Pra-Niti-01/06 517 dated 16.06.2006 which has not been published in the official Gazette hence its applicability is not justified. Therefore court below is directed to calculate the condonation fee as per sanction map vide plan case no -PMC/Arara (C)-7-151/10 dated 12-07-2010 under the provision of Appendix-L office order 171/2000 dated 25.08.2000.
(c) Since the appellant has committed some violations as deviation as extension in Construction of Basement (positive deviation). Therefore, an amount of Rs. 2,00,000/- (Rs. Two Lakh) fine is being imposed upon the appellant under proviso of section 315 The Bihar Municipal Act, 2007 in addition to compounding fees etc if any in accordance with law. The appellant shall deposit compounding & Condonation fee against the area beyond sanction.
(d) Appellant may not use the all Cineplex without extension of permission from A.A.A. because as para 7 of NOC it was valid for 5 year from the date of issue (15-03-2010) which is already lapsed on 16-03-15 during pendency of this appeal. Then after due permission/sanction of District Magistrate Patna/Authority who must see that is there sufficient road and parking space for smooth functioning of Multiplex as well traffic in Patna High Court CWJC No.10698 of 2019(5) dt.12-07-2023 7/8 present situation.
(e) Appellant is strictly directed to leave required land strip (1.52 Meter) in front setbacks under the provision of future plan of road widening.
In such circumstances, we consider it appropriate to modify the order dated 19.11.2014 passed in vigilance case no 12A/2013 to the extent stated above and direction to calculate the condonation fee as per building bye laws with comparison of sanction map within two months from the date of this order and appellant is directed to deposit the said amount within two months. Thereafter, appellant may proceed further.
(g) After compliance of above modification of order count below may permit appellant for proper use of the entire building.
Let a copy of this order be forwarded to the learned Municipal Commissioner, Patna for information and needful."
Now, it was the turn of 'the PMC' to file this writ petition.
On query, learned Counsel appearing for 'the PMC' candidly accepts that no such gazette notification was published and has concurred with the information given by the Gulzarbagh Printing Press.
As the petitioner is unable to assist further, the Court Patna High Court CWJC No.10698 of 2019(5) dt.12-07-2023 8/8 properly and is seeking adjournment, it would be appropriate that Respondent No. 5 be heard.
Issue notice to the Respondent No. 5 through both processes i.e. ordinary as well as registered cover with A/D for which requisites etc. must be filed within a period of two weeks failing which the application shall stand rejected without further reference to the Bench.
List this case after service of notice.
(Rajiv Roy, J) Neha/-
U