Sanjay Jain & Others vs State Of MP And Others

Rajeev Kumar Shrivastava, J

This petition is preferred against the letter/order dated 22.12.2019 issued by respondent No.4, directing the City Planer for cancelling the building permission granted to the petitioners on 7.3.2017. In the said letter dated 22.12.2019 it is stated that permission was granted for the land adjoining to Nala, which could not be granted as per Madhya Pradesh Bhumi Vikas Rules 2012, as 9 mtrs. land from Nala has not been kept left.

Petitioners are co-owners of a plot situated over part of survey Nos. 1955, 1956, 1948, 1949/1, admeasuring 5000 sq.ft. in village Gospura, Preetam Vihar, Gwalior. The petitioners purchased the aforesaid land vide two registered sale deeds dated 27. 10.2014 and 13.12.2004 from earlier owners. Out of 5000 sq.ft. land, 3000 sq.ft. area is already constructed and 2000 sq.ft. area is in shape of open plot. Permissions for construction over 3000 sq.ft. land are dated 10.5.1989 and 7.3.2017 (Annexures P/6 and P/7). Learned counsel for the petitioners contended that while passing the orders Annexures P/1 & P/2 no opportunity of hearing was granted which is against the mandate of Section 299-A of the Municipal Corporation Act, 1956 (for brevity, the 'Act of 1956') and permissions were revoked saying that 9 mtr land is to be left from Nala.

2.1 Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that building permission was granted to the petitioners on 7.3.2017. As per permission construction was granted and construction is almost complete. It is further submitted that after grant of permission construction was raised and no fault can be attributed to the petitioners. The petitioners represented against the aforesaid letter/order to respondents No.2 to 4 but till date no action has been taken. The petitioners are having bonafide belief of demolition of their building, therefore the present petition has been filed for quashing Annexures P/1 and P/2 dated 22.12.2019 and 24.12.2019, respectively.

2.2 Learned counsel for the petitioners contended that principles of natural justice have not been followed. The so-called Nala is not visible on the spot or in the vicinity of petitioners' plot. Virtually it is a water outlet encompassed in a 5x5 sq.ft. RCC slab underground. The petitioners have not raised any construction over the said RCC slab and on both sides of the said water outlet/ Nala, space of 7 ft. is left open. In fact, no Nala existed on the spot. Alternative prayer is that in case any portion of construction is found illegal then the petitioners are ready to compound under the Act of 1956 and the rules made thereunder. In support of his version, learned counsel for the petitioners have placed reliance on the judgments in Nagar Palika Nigam Gwalior vs. Gopal Krishna [2006 (2) MPLJ 515] and Ramesh Verma vs. Indore Municipal Corporation [2018 (3) JLJ 366].

Per Contra, learned counsel for the respondents opposed the submissions of learned counsel for the petitioners and submitted that the present petition has been filed by the petitioners challenging the validity of the orders Annexures P/1 & P/2, issued by Joint Director, Town & Country Planning, Gwalior and Building Officer, Municipal Corporation, Gwalior, respectively. Respondents have denied the facts and grounds set out in the memo of petition stating that the Town & Country Planning is an authority to relegate building permission within the municipal limits of various local bodies. Town & Country Planning vide order dated 22.12.2019 instructed City Planer, Municipal Corporation, Gwalior for grant of permission of the land adjoining the Nala as per provisions of Madhya Pradesh Bhumi Vikas Rules, 2012 and permission was granted by leaving space of 9 mtrs. from Nala. The order, Annexure P/2, is rightly passed. It is further submitted that the disputed question of fact in regard to the space between Nala and newly constructed building cannot be adjudicated in writ jurisdiction of this Court. Hence, prayed to dismiss the petition.

Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the available documents.

For the sake of convenience, Annexures P/1 and P/2 are reproduced below :-

Annexure P/1

"कार्यालय संयुक्त संचालक नगर तथा ग्राम निवेश ग्वालियर

क्र./क्यू/अपठित/अपठित/ग्वालियर2019 ग्वालियर दिनांक 22.12.2019

प्रति,

सिटी सेंटर

नगर निगम ग्वालियर

विषय : प्रीतम विहार कालोनी में नाले के पास दी गई अनुज्ञा बावत।

उपरोक्त विषयान्तर्गत निवेदन है कि प्रीतम विहार कालोनी के भवन क्रमांक 423 पर नगर निगम के पालन क्र. पी.आर.एम./0186/जेड.11/2017 दिनांक 07.03.2017 द्वारा दी गई अनुज्ञा का परीक्षण करने पर पाया गया कि उक्त अनुज्ञा नाले के किनारे की भूमि पर दी गई है जबकि म.प्र. भूमि निवासरण निगम 292 के प्रावधानो के अनुसार नाले के 9 मीटर छोड़कर ही मानक अनुज्ञा दी जाती है अतः नियमों के प्रावधानों के प्रतिकूल दी गई भवन निर्माण अनुज्ञा को निरसत कर आनुशांगिक कार्यवाही करने का कष्ट करें।

हस्ताक्षर

संयुक्त संचालक

नगर तथा ग्राम निवेश

ग्वालियर (म.प्र.)"

Annexure P/2

"कार्यालय आयुक्त नगर पालिक निगम ग्वालियर

क्र्Z11W30/1112/2019/3x3/भवन/510 ग्वा0,दिनांक 24/12/2019

प्रति,

श्री संजय जैन पुत्र श्री प्रेमचन्द्र जैन

श्री अनुराग जैन पुत्र श्री अशोक जैन

423 प्रीतम बिहार ठाटीपुर ग्वालियर,

विषय : म.प्र. भूमि विकास नियम 2012 के नियम 25 अंतर्गत भवन अनुमति का प्रतिसहरण (REVOKE) करने बावत।

उपरोक्त विषय में लेख है कि आपको प्रीतम बिहार के भूखण्ड क्र. 423 पर आनलाईन भवन निर्माण अनुश्रा दिनांक 07 मार्च 2017 को जारी की गई थी।

संयुक्त संचालक नगर तथा ग्राम निवेश ग्वालियर का पत्र क्र.क्यू/नगा्रनि/2019 दिनांक 22/12/2019 अनुसार म.प्र. भूमि विकास नियम 2012 के नियम 25 के आधार पर प्रकरण क्र्Z11W30/1112/2019/3x3श्री संजय जैन पुत्र श्री प्रेमचन्द्र जैन श्री अनुराग जैन पुत्र श्री अशोक जैन 423 प्रीतम, बिहार ठाटीपुर ग्वालियर यूनिवर्सिटी रोड ग्वालियर को पूर्व प्रदत्त भवन निर्माण स्वीकृति प्रतिसहरण (REVOKE) की जाती है।

सूचित हो

भवन अधिकारी

नगर निगम ग्वालियर

प्रतिलिपि :-

आयुक्त, नगर निगम, ग्वालियर।

अपर आयुक्त, नगर निगम, ग्वालियर।

सिटी प्लानर, नगर निगम, ग्वालियर।

भवन अधिकारी

नगर निगम ग्वालियर"

5.1 It is  apparent  from  Annexure  P/7  that  aforesaid permission was granted under Rule 27 of Madhya Pradesh Bhumi Vikas Rules, 2012 subject to various conditions to be fulfilled before/while carrying out construction. Rule 27 of Bhumi Vikas Rules runs as under :-

"27. Grant of permission or refusal.-(1) The Authority may either sanction or refuse the plans and specifications or may sanction them with such modifications or directions or condition as it may deem appropriate and thereupon shall communicate its decisions to th applicant in Appendix-D. One set of Sanctioned Plan (ammonia prints/white print) shall be cloth mounted/laminated which shall be retained in the office of the Authority for record.

(2) If in the opinion of the Authority, the layout of plots or alignment of the street or access ways are not conductive to smooth movement of traffic or would detrimentally affect the layout or development of adjoining lands, the authority shall require the applicant to alter the layout as deemed necessary. The specifications of the development works like roads, sewage, water supply, electricity as prescribed by the respective state works department shall be adhered to in the development works."

Clause 5 of letter dated 7.3.2017 (Annexure P/7) says as under :-

"भवन निर्माण का कार्य निगम के लाइसेंसी सुपरवाईजर, इंजीनियर तथा आर्किटेक्ट की देखरेख में ही स्वीकृति के अनुरूप करना अनिवार्य होगा। अन्य स्थिति में लिखित आवेदन पर ही यह माना जावेगा कि उक्त कार्य सुपरवाईजर, इंजीनियर तथा आर्किटेक्ट की देखरेख में नही हो रहा है तथा केवल भवन स्वामी ही समस्त वैध निर्माण के लिये उत्तरदायी होगा। म.प्र. भूमि विकास नियम 2012 के नियमों का पालन करने की जवाबदारी लाइसेंसी इंजीनियर एवं भवन निर्माता की होगी।"

In Clause 50 (kha) of Madhya Pradesh Gazette Notification dated 1.6.2012 (Annexure P/8), it is specified as under:-

"यदि स्थल जल निकाय/जल स्त्रोत के उच्चतम जल स्तर से 9 मीटर और नदी के मामले में 15 मीटर की दूरी के भीतर हो या जैसा कि विकास रेखांक में विहित हो।"

The Nala area is shown in the Photographs produced by the petitioner (at page 23 of paper book).

Section 292 of the Act of 1956 imposes restrictions on Corporation's power to undertake town planning scheme, which reads as follows :-

"292. Restriction on Corporation's power to undertake town planning scheme.-Notwithstanding anything contained in section 269, no town planning scheme shall be made by the Corporation for any area for which a scheme has been sanctioned under the provisions of Town Improvement Trust."

In the light of aforesaid, Annexure P/1 was issued by the Joint Director, Town & Country Planning, Gwalior. In compliance of aforesaid, Annexure P/2 revoking the permission granted vide letter dated 7.3.2017 has been issued. Petitioners have raised objection that prior opportunity of hearing was not given to the petitioners before revocation of permission.

At this juncture, Section 299-A of the Act of 1956 is apt to be quoted as under :-

"299-A. Power of State Government to cancel or revise permission for construction of a building.-- If it is found that any permission for construction of a building has been given in violation of any provision of this Act or rules or byelaws made thereunder or in the opinion of the State Government it is necessary in the public interest that the permission granted by the Municipal Corporation deserves to be cancelled or revised, the State Government shall have power to cancel or revise such permission and on such cancellation or revision, as the case may be, any construction contrary to the order regarding cancellation or revision shall be deemed to be without permission and shall be dealt with in accordance with the provisions of this Act and the rules made thereunder:

Provided that no such order shall be passed unless the aggrieved party has been given an opportunity of being heard."

From the above provision, it is crystal clear that if it is found that any permission for construction of a building has been granted in violation of any provision of this Act or rules or byelaws made thereunder or in the opinion of the State Government it is necessary in the public interest that the permission granted by the Municipal Corporation deserves to be cancelled or revised, the State Government shall have power to cancel or revise such permission and on such cancellation or revision, as the case may be, any construction contrary to the order regarding cancellation or revision shall be deemed to be without permission and shall be dealt with in accordance with the provisions of this Act and the rules made thereunder. That means, the aforesaid provision is mandatory but is circumscribed by the proviso that no such order shall be passed unless the aggrieved party has been given an opportunity of being heard. However, Section 299-A does not put embargo on the Corporation exercising power after commencement of construction pursuant to the permission granted. See, Rajesh Asnani v. State of M.P. [2012 (2) MPLJ 128].

However, in the case in hand, the petitioners cannot be allowed to take shelter of proviso to Section 299-A of the Act of 1956, since the permission was subject to presumption of compliance of provisions of MP Bhumi Vikas Rules, 2012 including that at least 9 mtrs. land shall be left open from a Nala. Yet the construction in question has been made violating the sanctioned plan.

Even otherwise grant of opportunity of hearing would be an exercise in futility, since the petitioner has not disputed that the construction has been made within the 9 meters prohibitive area from Nala. Thus, the "empty formality theory" [See, Aligarh Muslim Unversity v. Mansoor Ali Khan, (2000) 7 SCC 529] comes in way of petitioner.

With this factual background allowing of this writ petition merely on grounds of violation of principle of audi alteram partem would amount to grant of premium to default.

In above view of the matter, this writ petition being sans substance is hereby dismissed with no cost.