Downloaded On - 22/04/2021 ... vs Unknown
2021 Latest Caselaw 2681 HP

CWP No. 2574 of 2020

20.04.2021 Present: Mr. Ramakant Sharma, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Tara Singh Chauhan, Advocate, for the petitioners.

.

Mr. N. K. Gupta, Advocate, for respondent No. 1.

Mr. Vinod Thakur, Mr. Vikas Rathore, Mr. Shiv Pal Manhans, Addl. A.Gs. with Mr. J. S. Guleria and Mr. Bhupinder Thakur, Dy. A.Gs., for respondents -

State.

(Through Video Conferencing)

The instant petition has been filed for the

grant of following substantive reliefs:-

(i) That a writ in the nature of writ of certiorari may rbe issued thereby quashing and setting aside

impugned order Annexure P-21, dated 18.07.2020 passed by respondent No. 1.

(ii) That a writ in the nature of writ of mandamus may be issued thereby directing respondent No. 1

to permit the petitioners to complete the repair works in accordance with permission granted vide Annexures P-6 and P-7 dated 20.06.2019 as well as

plan sanctioned by State Heritage Advisory

Committee in its meeting held on 10.02.2020 vide Annexure P-12 as well as, as per structural stability certificate/report placed on record by the

petitioners with respondent No. 1, vide Annexure P-

2. The main defence taken by the Municipal

Corporation to oppose the claim of the petitioner is that

the NGT has restrained the Corporation from permitting

any construction even on old line beyond two storeys and

attic floor. Reliance in support of this submission is placed

upon the direction No. 112 (IV) issued by the NGT in

Original Application No. 121 of 2014, titled as

Yogindra Mohan Sengupta vs. Union of India & Ors.,

which read as under:-

.

IV. Wherever the old residential structures exists in the Core area or the Green/Forest area which are

found to be unfit for human habitation and are in a seriously dilapidated condition, the Implementation Committee constituted under this judgment may permit construction/reconstruction of the building

but strictly within the legally permissible structure limits of the old building and for the same/permissible legal use. The Competent r Authority shall sanction the plans and/or approve the same only to that extent and no more; under

any circumstances such plans must not be beyond two storeys and an attic floor and only for residential purpose.

3. Prima facie the stand taken by the Corporation

cannot be countenanced because the directions passed by

the NGT only relate to residential structure and not

commercial structures as is the case in hand.

4. Confronted with this, learned counsel for the

Corporation prays for and is granted two weeks' time to

obtain instructions.

List on 04.05.2021.

(Tarlok Singh Chauhan), Judge

(Chander Bhusan Barowalia) Judge April 20, 2021 (Sanjeev)