2015 (8) TMI 1562 - HC - Indian Laws

Illegal Construction or not - sanction was granted to the petitioner by the Municipal Corporation or not - HELD THAT - It is clear that the petitioner has not been summoned by the Lokayukt Organization in regard to any criminal case. The Organization has registered an Inquiry Case No.134/2013 and conducting the inquiry against the officers of the Municipal Corporation and it is necessary to find out that whether permission for construction of a house was granted illegally or not. The Organization has a right to conduct the inquiry against the officers or employees of the Municipal Corporation. The Corporation has issued notice to the petitioner in regard to illegal construction. It is an independent issue. If any illegal construction has been made by the petitioner the Corporation has its right to take action in accordance with law and if the petitioner has made the construction in accordance with proper sanction, she can very well place the fact before the Corporation. Corporation is at liberty to proceed in accordance with law. Petition disposed off.

Summary

Issues: Jurisdiction of Lokayukt Organization to conduct an inquiry against a petitioner who is not a public servant, legality of construction by the petitioner, authority of Municipal Corporation to take action against illegal construction

Jurisdiction of Lokayukt Organization:
The petitioner filed a petition seeking relief from the High Court, challenging the inquiry initiated by Lokayukt Organization against her, arguing that as a housewife and not a public servant, she falls outside the jurisdiction of the Organization. The respondent Organization justified the inquiry based on a complaint alleging illegal permission for construction granted by Municipal Corporation officers. The High Court noted that the petitioner had not been summoned for a criminal case but that the inquiry aimed to determine if the construction permission was granted illegally. The Court opined that the Organization had the right to conduct the inquiry against Municipal Corporation officers or employees, as the petitioner could challenge any adverse actions in subsequent proceedings.

Legality of Construction:
The petitioner claimed to have constructed her house in compliance with the permission granted by the Municipal Corporation and denied any illegal construction. The Municipal Corporation had issued a notice regarding alleged illegal construction, emphasizing that if the petitioner had indeed built without proper authorization, the Corporation could take lawful action. Conversely, if the construction was as per sanctioned plans, the petitioner could present evidence to the Corporation. The High Court acknowledged the Corporation's authority to act in accordance with the law based on the legality of the construction.

Authority of Municipal Corporation:
The High Court emphasized that the Municipal Corporation had the discretion to address any illegal construction by the petitioner within the bounds of the law. The Court clarified that if the petitioner had violated construction regulations, the Corporation could take appropriate measures, while also allowing the petitioner to demonstrate compliance with the sanctioned plans. The judgment concluded by disposing of the writ petition with the mentioned observations and no costs awarded, leaving the Corporation free to proceed as per legal provisions regarding the construction matter.

In summary, the High Court upheld the Lokayukt Organization's jurisdiction to conduct an inquiry into the construction permissions granted by Municipal Corporation officers, affirmed the Corporation's authority to address illegal constructions, and provided the petitioner with the opportunity to challenge any adverse actions in subsequent proceedings.