Recently, the Bombay High Court refused to grant relief to a developer accused of obtaining construction permissions through misrepresentation and misleading documents, while strongly reiterating that courts cannot show sympathy toward illegal constructions. The Court dismissed the writ petition filed by Jhalak Constructions challenging the revocation of its development permission by the Ulhasnagar Municipal Corporation.
The dispute arose after the Municipal Corporation revoked permissions granted for the “Jhalak Paradise” project under Section 51 of the Maharashtra Regional Town Planning Act, 1966. The petitioners had obtained approval for a 16-floor building project in Ulhasnagar and had already completed construction up to 14 floors. The developers contended that they had followed all legal procedures, paid scrutiny and development charges, relinquished portions of land for DP roads, and secured revised permissions after inspections by municipal authorities. They further alleged that the stop-work notices and subsequent revocation were politically motivated and issued without proper grounds.
On the other hand, the Municipal Corporation argued that the developers, along with their architect, had submitted misleading plans and documents to secure permissions despite knowing that nearly 80% of the plot was affected by proposed 24-meter and 36-meter Development Plan roads. The Corporation also informed the Court that disciplinary action had already been taken against the concerned town planning officer who had approved the project.
A Division Bench comprising Justice A.S. Gadkari and Justice Kamal Khata observed that “fraud vitiates all orders” and held that a party cannot benefit from its own wrongdoing. The Court emphatically stated that investments made by developers or flat purchasers cannot justify regularization of illegal construction. Relying upon recent Supreme Court precedents, the Bench observed that courts must adopt a strict approach against unauthorized constructions and avoid “misplaced sympathy.”
The Court further remarked that municipal authorities are guardians of planned urban development and emphasized the need for stern action against erring officials responsible for permitting illegal projects. It noted that the entire structure stood vitiated due to permissions allegedly procured through misrepresentation.
Accordingly, the High Court dismissed the petition, refused to stay the operation of its order, and directed the Municipal Corporation to proceed with action in accordance with law.
Case Title: Jhalak Constructions & Ors. v. Ulhasnagar Municipal Corporation & Ors.
Case No.: Writ Petition No. 14342 of 2024
Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice A.S. Gadkari and Hon’ble Mr. Justice Kamal Khata
Advocate for the Appellant: Mr. Girish Agrawal a/w Ms. Chitra Danekar and Mr. Karan Singh
Advocate for the Respondent: Mr. Vijay D. Patil, Senior Advocate , Mr. Yogesh Patil, Smt. Leena Patil
Read Judgment @Latestlaws.com
Picture Source :
