Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

(4) If the Structural Engineer recommends any corrective repairs for securing the structural stability of the building, such corrective repairs shall be carried out by the owner or occupier of a building to the satisfaction of the Commissioner.

(5) Any owner or occupier, as the case may be, who fails to carry out corrective repairs for securing structural stability, within a period of six months from the date of report of the Structural Engineer, shall be punished with the fine as provided in section 471.

"354. Removal of structures, etc., which are in ruins or likely to fall (1) If it shall at any time appear to the Commissioner that any structure (including under this expression any building, wall or other structure and anything affixed to or projecting from any building, wall or other structure) is in a ruinous condition, or likely to fall, or in any way dangerous to any person occupying, resorting to or passing by such structure or any other structure or place in the neighbourhood thereof, the Commissioner may, by written notice, require the owner or occupier of such structure to pull down, secure or repair such structure subject to the provisions of section 342 of danger therefrom. (2) The Commissioner may also if he thinks fit, require the said owner or occupier, by the said notice, either forthwith or before proceeding to pull down, secure or repair the said structure, to set up a proper and sufficient hoard or fence for the protection of passers by and other persons, with a convenient platform and hand-rail, if there be room enough for the same and the Commissioner shall think the same desirable, to serve as a footway for passengers outside of such hoard or fence."

3rd January 2024 913-OSWP-3463-2021.DOC

21. Now sub-section (1) of Section 354 tells us all that is required in a matter like this. The notice under Section 354 is to be given to the owner or occupier of the structure to pull down, repair or secure the structure.

22. What the Petitioner now seeks by mounting a challenge to a notice that was five years prior to the date of the filing of the Petition and five years prior to the date of the acquisition award. is to set the clock back entirely and, in effect, by this Writ Petition seek to nullify effectively the entire acquisition proceedings. That this is being done at considerable risk to the public can hardly be denied.

26. The Petitioner actually obtained a structural audit report of 9th July 2018. A copy of that report is annexed at Exhibit "G" to the limited Affidavit in Reply. This is by a private consultant and not by a reputed institute. The purported classification of the building was only for structural repairs, but this is by no means accepted and is also contentious because the report itself notes that structural elements and members are severely damaged and corroded. Inconsistently, that same structural consultant then purported to issue a certificate saying that the building was structurally stable.