Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

4. Thereafter, on 15.02.2021 another notice under Section 353B of the Act of 1888 came to be issued and pursuant thereto, another structural audit report came to be submitted classifying the buildings "Swaroop & Sumant" as C2-A meaning thereby that the buildings would be required to be evacuated and/or partially 8th June 2023 909-oswpl-15116-2023.doc demolished requiring major structural repairs. A time period of seven months was indicated for undertaking structural repairs. A third notice under Section 353B came to be issued on 13.02.2023. It is thereafter that the notice under Section 354 of the Act of 1888 came to be issued on 17.02.2023 requiring all the four buildings of the society to be pulled down.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that since issuance of the first notice under Section 353B of the Act of 1888, on 23.03.2017 the buildings of the society were inspected and it was found that except minor repairs, there was no need to demolish the same as has been proposed by the impugned notice. The initial structural audit report had categorized the buildings as C-3 not requiring any eviction, but only minor repairs. The subsequent notice also required partial demolition and not demolition of the entire structures. Despite aforesaid, the Municipal Corporation proceeded to issue another notice on 13.01.2023 under Section 353B and shortly thereafter notice under Section 354 of the Act of 1888 came to be issued on 17.02.2023. There was no opportunity for the petitioners to obtain a fresh structural audit report pursuant to the notice under Section 353B of the Act of 1888. Considering the earlier reports as issued, the petitioners ought to be permitted to obtain a fresh structural audit report after which if the same did not categorize the buildings as C-1, the matter could be referred to the Technical Advisory Committee - TAC. Learned counsel referred to an order passed by the Co- operative Court in a dispute pending between Petitioner No.1 and the Society wherein the resolution passed in the Annual General Meeting had been stayed. The petitioners being occupants of their respective flats, they were entitled to obtain a fresh structural audit report in the matter. Though the petitioners were not opposed to the re-

8th June 2023 909-oswpl-15116-2023.doc development of the buildings, it was necessary for the Municipal Corporation to follow the guidelines prevailing and act in accordance with law. Since the same was not been done, the notice under Section 354 of the Act of 1888 was under challenge.

6. Learned counsel for the Municipal Corporation opposed the aforesaid submissions. According to him, the Corporation was concerned with the four buildings that formed the housing society and the reports relied upon by the petitioners did not pertain to all the said buildings. After the buildings were classified as C2-B, permission to carry out repairs therein came to be granted by the Municipal Corporation on 11.09.2017. After a period of almost seven years, the second notice dated 15.02.2021 came to be issued by the Municipal Corporation with regard to all the four buildings of the society. The structural audit report received thereafter pertained only to two buildings namely Sumant and Swaroop. The said buildings were categorized as C2-A, which indicated that major structural repairs were called for. This structural audit report was not objected to by the petitioners within the prescribed time, and therefore, there was no question of any further reference being made to the TAC. It was pointed out that on 09.01.2023 a slab of one of the buildings had collapsed and in that context, notice under Section 353B of the Act of 1888 came to be issued on 13.01.2023. Since the said report was accepted by the Society, question of referring the matter to the TAC did not arise. The Municipal Commissioner having recorded his satisfaction as contemplated by Section 354 of the Act of 1888, he was justified in sanctioning the issue of the notice dated 17.02.2023. The entire action was taken in accordance with law, and therefore, there was no case to interfere in writ jurisdiction.

8th June 2023 909-oswpl-15116-2023.doc Learned counsel for the Society is justified in contending that the rights of the petitioners, who are members of the housing society would be governed through the Society and any independent rights qua the Society would have to be agitated before another forum. Notwithstanding the aforesaid, on considering the issues raised on merit, we find that prior to issuance of the impugned notice on 17.02.2023 there have been earlier structural audit reports categorizing the buildings of the society as C2- A requiring evacuation and/or partial demolition with major structural repairs in terms of the report dated 29.03.2022. Coupled with the said report, it is further seen that the slab of one of the buildings collapsed on 09.01.2023 after which another notice under Section 353B came to be issued on 13.01.2023. The Structural Audit Report obtained by the Municipal Corporation with regard to all the structures was considered and pursuant thereto, the impugned notice has been issued. Though allegations of malice in law are sought to be urged, there are no sufficient pleadings in that regard. Further as per the guidelines for declaring private and municipal buildings as C-1 category, if no objection is received to a structural audit report by a tenant/occupant within fifteen days, the Municipal Corporation is required to act in accordance with Clause 1.07 and proceed further in the matter of obtaining sanction for declaring the building as C-1 category. It is undisputed that there is no such report pertaining to all the buildings that could be relied upon by the petitioners.