Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

4) Whether the impugned order at Annexure-A could have been passed without referring to the alleged violations and/or deviations of

- 33 -

NC: 2024:KHC:404 the Building Bye-laws holding the construction put up by the petitioners to be illegal?

5) What order?

26. I answer the above points as under

27. Sections 308, 321, 462 of the Municipal Corporation Act, reads as under:

31. Answer to Point No.4: Whether the impugned order at Annexure-A could have been passed without referring to the alleged violations and/or deviations of the Building bye-laws holding the construction put up by the petitioners to be illegal?

- 47 -

NC: 2024:KHC:404 31.1. In the present case, the allegation made against the petitioners is that without applying for and obtaining a plan sanction, construction have been put up. Therefore, the same is illegal requiring its demolition.

- 58 -

NC: 2024:KHC:404 demolition only on account of building sanction not having obtained.

31.14. Hence, I answer point No.4 by holding that the impugned order at Annexure-A could not have been passed merely on account of there being no plan sanction without referring to and considering if there is any violation or deviation from Building bye-laws. In the event of there being no violation or deviation from the Building Bye-laws, the respondent authorities could after collecting necessary fees issue necessary building plans/sanction plan to enable the regularization of the said building directing to make payment of property tax along with due penalty from the date on which the construction was made without obtaining the plan sanction.