2005 (3) TMI 806 - SC - Indian Laws

Summary

Issues Involved:
1. Legality of unauthorized construction.
2. Right to inspection of documents and grant of certified copies.
3. Jurisdiction of the Municipal Council to regularize unauthorized constructions.
4. Validity of the Municipal Council's resolution dated 12th October 1998.
5. Discretionary power of the High Court to order demolition.

Issue-wise Detailed Analysis:

1. Legality of Unauthorized Construction:

The First Respondent, an advocate and Chief Trustee of Ganpati Devasthan, Bhiwandi, filed a writ petition alleging illegal constructions on private and government lands in Bhiwandi. The Appellants had obtained a repair permission for ground and two upper floors but constructed a building with ground plus six floors. The High Court noted that the Appellants did not deny the allegations and had not filed any return. The Municipal Council had issued a notice to the Appellants to stop the unauthorized construction and comply with the directions, failing which the construction would be demolished. The Supreme Court confirmed that only repair permission had been granted, and the Appellants had not filed an application for regularization within a reasonable time.

2. Right to Inspection of Documents and Grant of Certified Copies:

The High Court held that the First Respondent was entitled to inspection of documents and grant of certified copies on payment of requisite charges. The Supreme Court upheld this decision, directing the Municipal Council to issue certified copies of the documents within four weeks.

3. Jurisdiction of the Municipal Council to Regularize Unauthorized Constructions:

The Appellants argued that the Municipal Council had the jurisdiction to regularize unauthorized constructions by compounding offences upon accepting compounding fees. However, the Supreme Court noted that the Municipal Council, being a statutory authority, must operate within the confines of the statute. The power to regularize unauthorized constructions is not vested in the Municipal Council, and its jurisdiction is limited to dealing with applications for construction permissions as per Section 44 of the MRTP Act.

4. Validity of the Municipal Council's Resolution Dated 12th October 1998:

The High Court quashed the Municipal Council's resolution dated 12th October 1998, which sought to regularize unauthorized constructions upon imposition of penalties. The Supreme Court upheld this decision, noting that the State of Maharashtra had not approved the resolution. The Municipal Council's power is confined to compounding offences in certain cases, and the resolution was beyond its statutory authority.

5. Discretionary Power of the High Court to Order Demolition:

The High Court directed the demolition of the unauthorized structure if the interim order was vacated by the Civil Court. The Supreme Court supported this directive, emphasizing that unauthorized constructions must be dealt with sternly to uphold the rules of planned development. The Court cited previous judgments to reinforce that unauthorized constructions should not be condoned and must be demolished if they cannot be regularized. The Supreme Court dismissed the appeals and directed the Municipal Council to carry out the High Court's order expeditiously.

Conclusion:

The Supreme Court dismissed the appeals, directing the Municipal Council to demolish the unauthorized structure within four weeks. The Appellants were also ordered to deposit Rs. 50,000 with the National Legal Services Authority for misleading the Court. The judgment emphasized strict adherence to statutory provisions and the importance of planned urban development.