Pradeep Kumar Jain Vs Ranchi Municipal Corporation through Its Municipal Commissioner

06/12.06.2024 The present writ petition has been filed for quashing the order dated 29.03.2022 passed by the Appellate Tribunal, Ranchi Regional Development Authority (RRDA), Ranchi in Misc. Appeal No. 23/2018 whereby the appeal preferred by the petitioner has been dismissed and the order dated 21.04.2018 passed by the Municipal Commissioner, Ranchi Municipal Corporation, Ranchi in U.C Case No. 41/2017 has been affirmed whereby the petitioner was directed to pay a penalty of Rs.1,00,000/- under Section 428 of the Jharkhand Municipal Act, 2011 [hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act, 2011’] and to demolish the tworoom-flat unauthorizedly constructed in parking area of ground floor of the building in question under Section 436 of the Act, 2011.

¶15

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is the owner of the building situated at Harmu Road, Ranchi the building plan of which was sanctioned vide B.C. Case No. 460 of 2013. The petitioner felt necessity of extending the said building and as such he submitted the proposed building plan for extension of the same before the Ranchi Municipal Corporation, Ranchi vide Proposal No. BP/W30/0121/2018 which was received in the office of the Corporation on 27.03.2018. However, no action was taken by the respondentCorporation on the said revised building plan, although the requisite fee and other documents were submitted by him.

¶16

1

¶17

It is further submitted that a proceeding was initiated against the petitioner by the respondents vide U.C. Case No. 41/2017 alleging that he had constructed two rooms in the parking area on the ground floor of the said building without getting the map sanctioned by the Ranchi Municipal Corporation, Ranchi. The petitioner filed show cause reply stating that there was no deviation over the land in question, however, the respondent No.1 vide order dated 21.04.2018, observed that the petitioner had unauthorizedly constructed the unit of two rooms in the parking area at the ground floor and further directed to remove the alleged unauthorized construction within 30 days, failing which the same would be forcibly demolished by the said respondent. The petitioner was also directed to pay a penalty of Rs.1,00,000/-.

¶18

It is also submitted that the respondent No.1 has put much reliance on the report of the physical verification of the said building submitted by the Junior Engineer, Ranchi Municipal Corporation, Ranchi, however, the same was conducted behind the back of the petitioner. The petitioner preferred an appeal before the Appellate Tribunal, Ranchi Regional Development Authority, Ranchi, which was registered as Misc. Appeal No. 23/2018, however, the same was also dismissed by the Tribunal vide order dated 29.03.2022 without considering the fact that the building plan of the petitioner was sanctioned in the year 2013 as per Old Building Bye-laws and thus Section 428 of the Act, 2011 would not be applicable in his case.

¶19

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the relevant materials available on record. On bare perusal of the order dated 21.04.2018 passed by the respondent No.1, it appears that the spot verification of the said building was conducted by the Junior Engineer, Ranchi Municipal Corporation, Ranchi, who submitted the report stating that construction of two rooms in the parking area at the ground floor of the said building was in deviation of the existing building plan sanctioned vide B.C. Case No. 460/2013. The petitioner

¶20

2

¶21

though accepted the said deviation, yet he failed to submit the revised building plan on various dates of hearing fixed by the respondent No.1 in U. C. Case No. 41/2017 and hence the respondent No.1 directed him to demolish the said unauthorized construction as well as to pay a penalty of Rs.1,00,000/- within prescribed time as mentioned in the said order.

¶22

The Appellate Tribunal in paragraph 8 of the impugned order dated 29.03.2022, has also observed as under:-

¶23

‘’8. From perusal of the L.C.R, it transpires that the unauthorized constructed flat at the parking area is sealed by the respondent on 22.04.2018. Further from the L.C.R, it transpires that J.E of respondent authority has reported to respondent that 2 rooms has been constructed on the ground floor at parking space. This fact is not denied by the appellant in entire memo of appeal that he has not constructed 2 rooms at the parking space. Thus, this Tribunal finds that the 2 rooms constructed at parking space without sanction by the appellant against his previous sanction plan 460/2013 as such the fine imposed by the respondent under section 428 Jharkhand Municipal Act, 2011 is proper and legal. Further this Tribunal finds and holds that the demolition order of the unauthorized construction of 2 rooms on the parking space is also as per law because it is constructed against the previous sanction plan B.C Case 460/2013.’’

¶24

Before this Court also, the petitioner has not denied the factum of construction of two rooms in the parking area in deviation of the building plan sanctioned vide B.C. Case No. 460/2013. Learned counsel for the petitioner has not been able to show that the alleged deviation is within the condonable limit. It is well settled that the power under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is exercised by the High Court to prevent miscarriage of justice and to correct grave and palpable error. In the case in hand, I do not find any such ground to interfere with the impugned orders dated 29.03.2022 passed by the Appellate Tribunal, Ranchi Regional Development Authority, Ranchi in Misc. Appeal No.

¶25

3

¶26

23/2018 as well as the order dated 21.04.2018 passed by the Municipal

¶27

Commissioner, Ranchi Municipal Corporation, Ranchi in U.C Case No. 41/2017.

¶28