1) Whether Municipal corporation is obliged to follow due process of law prior to demolition of unauthorised construction?
Mere issuance of notice under the said section is not sufficient to suggest that the due process of law has been followed, inasmuch as after issuance of notice, the concerned person would file response and which response has to be considered by appropriate officer designated for that purpose and that officer is obliged to pass decision, one way or the other. Moreover, such a decision has to be communicated to the affected person giving reasonable opportunity to that person to challenge that decision as permissible by law. There is nothing on record to show that such a course has been followed. Unless such a course was followed, it is not possible to conclude that due process of law has been complied with. If the record placed before the Court suggests that due process of law has not been complied with, then, obviously, the application as preferred by the petitioner deserves to be considered and appropriate orders passed thereon. However, as observed earlier, the Court below has rejected the application on the solitary ground, which is unacceptable for the reasons indicated above.
Bombay High Court
Mangesh Amar Ghorpade vs Kalyan Dombivali Municipal ... on 2 September, 2003
Equivalent citations: 2005 (3) BomCR 483
Khanwilkar A.M., J.
2)
Supreme Court guidelines on demolition of unauthorized construction by Municipal Corporation
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Civil Appeal Nos. 7627 and 7626 of 2019
Decided On: 24.10.2019
Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai Vs. Sunbeam High Tech Developers Private Ltd.
Hon'ble Judges/Coram:
Deepak Gupta and Aniruddha Bose, JJ.
Citation: AIR 2019 SC 5435, 2020 (1) ALLMR (SC) 967, MANU/SC/1467/2019
3) IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY
Writ Petns. Nos. 4765 to 4767 of 1995 and A.O. No. 477 of 1994
Decided On: 09.02.1996
Sopan Maruti Thopte Vs. Pune Municipal Corporation and Ors.
Hon'ble Judges/Coram:
M.B. Shah, CJ. and A.V. Savant, J.
Citation: AIR 1996 Bom 304
4) When High court should not issue a mandamus for the demolition of the unauthorized construction?
At the time of admission of this special leave petition, the provision of Section 351 of the Act was pointed out by the learned senior counsel to show that the Municipal Commissioner had only been conferred the power under the said provisions to demolish or not to demolish unauthorized structure and, therefore, the High Court ought not to have issued a mandamus for demolition of the temple before any order was passed by the Commissioner on the question of demolition.
Supreme Court of India
Muni Suvrat-Swami Jain S.M.P. ... vs Arun Nathuram Gaikwad & Ors on 11 October, 2006
No comments:
Post a Comment