Multiple NDPS Cases Without Conviction Cannot Justify Indefinite Pre-Trial Custody: Himachal Pradesh HC Grants Bail in Heroin Case Departmental Findings Based On Witnesses Discredited By Criminal Court Constitute 'No Evidence': Orissa High Court Upheld Constable's Reinstatement When Pension Rules Are Capable of More Than One Interpretation, Courts Must Lean in Favour of the Employee: MP High Court Wife Left Voluntarily — But Minor Children Cannot Be Taken Away: Madras High Court Intervenes in Habeas Corpus for Two Toddlers Where Consideration Does Not Pass in Terms of the Sale Deed, the Sale Deed Is Null and Void, a Nullity and Dead Letter in the Eyes of Law: Jharkhand High Court National Award-Winning Director's Script Was Registered Two Years Before Complainant Even Wrote His — Supreme Court Quashes Copyright Infringement Case Against 'Kahaani-2' Director IBC Clean Slate Does Not Wipe Out Right of Set-Off as Defence: Supreme Court Draws Critical Distinction Between Counterclaim and Defensive Plea GST Assessment Challenged on Natural Justice Grounds Tagged to Criminal Writ in Supreme Court Railway Cannot Escape Compensation by Crying 'Trespass' Without Eyewitness: Bombay High Court Reverses Tribunal, Awards Rs. 4 Lakh to Widow of Rolex Employee Master Plan Cannot Be Held Hostage to Subsequent Vegetation Growth — Supreme Court Settles Deemed Forest vs. Statutory Planning Conflict Contempt | Sold Property Despite Court's Restraint Order: Andhra Pradesh High Court Sentences One Month's Imprisonment Tractor-Run-Over Death Was An Accident, Not Murder: Allahabad High Court Acquits Three Accused Fast-Tracking Cannot Bury Justice: Supreme Court Sets Aside 21-Year-Delayed Appeal Decided Without Informing Convict Panchayat Act's Demolition Powers Cease Once Plot Falls Under Development Authority's Planning Area: Calcutta High Court Actual Date Of Woman Director's Appointment A Triable Issue; Prosecution Can't Be Quashed Merely On Claims Of Compliance: Calcutta High Court A Website Cannot Whisper and Then Punish: Delhi High Court Reins in DSSSB Over E-Dossier Rejections Mutual Consent Alone Ends the Marriage: Gujarat High Court Affirms Mubarat Divorce Without Formalities State Cannot Hide Behind "Oral Consent" or Delay When It Builds Roads Through Citizens' Land Without Due Process: Himachal Pradesh HC Show Cause Notice Alone Cannot Cut a Retired Engineer's Pension: Jharkhand High Court Bovine Smuggling Is a Law and Order Problem, Not a Public Order Threat: J&K High Court Quashes PSA Detention Article 22(2) Constitution | Production Beyond 24 Hours Not Fatal If Delay Explained And Travel Time Excluded: Karnataka High Court Article 227 Is Not an Appellate Power: High Court Refuses to Reassess Tribunal Findings on Pension Claim: Kerala High Court High Court Cannot Call A Complaint "False And Malicious" Without First Finding It Discloses No Cognizable Offence: Supreme Court When Jurisdiction Fails, Remand Cannot Cure It: Supreme Court Sets Aside Order Sending MSME Award Dispute Back to Functus Officio Facilitation Council Selling Inferior Pipes as 'Jain' or 'Jindal Gold' Brand Is Not Just a Civil Wrong — It's Cheating: MP High Court Refuses to Quash FIR Went to Collect Chit Fund Money, Got Arrested in Prostitution Raid: Telangana High Court Grants Bail to Woman Accused of Being Sub-Organiser Axe Blow During Sudden Quarrel Falls Under Exception 4 To Section 300 IPC, Not Murder: Orissa High Court Modifies Conviction To Culpable Homicide

Misleading Defenses and Non-Application of Mind Cannot Justify Illegal Construction: Bombay High Court Strikes Down Regularization of Unauthorized Construction

09 October 2024 11:51 AM

By: Admin


Bombay High Court quashed a regularization order passed by the Thane Municipal Corporation (TMC) that allowed the third respondent, a developer, to legalize an unauthorized construction over a public Nallah (drain) in Thane. The court ruled that the regularization was arbitrary, without legal basis, and a blatant misuse of powers under the Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning (MRTP) Act and the Maharashtra Municipal Corporations (MMC) Act. The High Court also criticized the TMC for misleading the court and attempting to justify the irregularity with irrelevant legal provisions.

The petition was filed by residents of the Tarangan Housing Complex, who challenged the TMC’s decision to regularize the construction of a road and RCC columns over a public Nallah that served as a natural watercourse. The unauthorized construction had been completed despite stop-work orders issued by the TMC in 2004. The construction obstructed access to the housing complex, which had previously enjoyed direct access to a service road.

In 2005, the TMC regularized the illegal structure, citing provisions of the MRTP Act and the MMC Act, which prompted the petitioners to challenge the legality of this regularization.

The key legal question was whether the TMC had the authority to regularize the unauthorized construction over a municipal Nallah, which posed significant risks to public infrastructure and water flow.

The regularization was arbitrary and violated provisions of the MRTP Act and the Development Control Regulations (DCR) of TMC.

The structure obstructed the natural flow of water, risking flooding and damage to public infrastructure.

The TMC had failed to provide any valid legal grounds to justify the regularization.

The TMC and the developer contended that the regularization was necessary to provide access to the housing complex and that the construction did not obstruct the flow of water in the Nallah.

The Bombay High Court, comprising Justices M.S. Sonak and Kamal Khata, found that the TMC’s regularization of the unauthorized construction was wholly arbitrary and a product of non-application of mind. The court observed that the TMC had initially issued stop-work orders and filed affidavits before the Civil Court stating that the construction was illegal and obstructed water flow in the Nallah. Yet, the TMC later performed a complete volte-face by regularizing the structure without any valid justification.

"The Municipal Commissioner and TMC are trustees of the power and property they wield and must exercise these powers in the interest of the public. Allowing regularization to benefit developers at the cost of public property like Nallahs amounts to an abuse of power."

The court also criticized the TMC for attempting to justify the regularization by invoking irrelevant provisions such as Section 227 of the MMC Act, which pertains to projections over streets and had no bearing on the case.

"It is unfortunate that the TMC sought to mislead the court by citing legal provisions that were not remotely applicable to the facts of the case," the judgment read.

 

Additionally, the court highlighted the broader issue of unauthorized construction being regularized as a matter of routine, despite clear legal prohibitions. Referring to the Supreme Court's rulings on illegal constructions, the court emphasized that regularization cannot be allowed merely by imposing fines or penalties.

The Bombay High Court quashed the TMC’s regularization order dated February 5, 2005, and ordered the demolition of the illegal construction. The court imposed costs of ₹2,00,000 on the TMC and the developer, directing them to pay ₹1,00,000 each to the petitioners. The decision sets a strong precedent against the arbitrary regularization of illegal constructions and reinforces the accountability of municipal authorities.

Date of Decision: October 7, 2024

Mr. Natvar T. Patel & Ors. vs. The State of Maharashtra & Ors.​.

Latest Legal News