Back
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
INDIRA BANERJEE, V. RAMASUBRAMANIAN, JJ.
Vikas Singh – Appellant
Versus
Govt. Of NCT Of Delhi & Ors. - Respondents
Civil Appeal No. 5244 of 2022 (Arising Out Of SLP (C) No. 16053 of 2016)
Decided on : 11-08-2022
(A) Delhi Development Act 1957 – Section 336 – New Delhi Municipal Council Act, 1994 – Section 241 – Delhi Fire Service Act 2007 – Sections 33, 34 and 35 – Revised Building Plan – Non-sanctioning – Amendment of Master Plan for Delhi – In terms of amended Master Plan, Appellant got a revised Building Plan prepared which provided for increase of height of building to 16.6 meters with stilt parking, which was well below 17.5 meters provided in amended Master Plan – Building partly constructed by Appellant is ground plus three floors – Height of building is 16.6 meters with parking stilt – If parking stilt is excluded height of building is well within 15 meters – Unified Building Bye-laws apply to all erection and reconstruction of buildings by virtue of Clause 1.7.0 thereof – Since Revised Building Plan is yet to be sanctioned it will be governed by Unified Building Bye-laws – Provisions of Unified Building Regulations are statutorily required to be construed harmoniously with Master Plan of Delhi. (Paras 42, 45 and 47)
(B) Unified Building Bye-Laws – Revised Building Plan – Non-sanctioning – Any construction has to conform to regulations made in larger interest of inhabitants of city, to protect environment, prevent fire, prevent accidents, provide for essential amenities etc. – Regulatory provisions for construction activities are in public interest – A building which is not a high rise building as per applicable rules or regulation cannot be compelled to comply with fire prevention and fire safety regulations applicable to high rise buildings – Under clause 8.0 of Unified Building Bye-Laws for Delhi 2016, clearance from Delhi Fire Service is mandatory only for High Rise Building – Appellant was entitled in law to take advantage of amended Master Plan for Delhi and he accordingly applied to SDMC for sanction of revised plan – Appellant must comply with safety requirements including fire requirements necessary for buildings which are not high rise – However, rules applicable to High Rise Buildings cannot be applied to buildings which are not High Rise Buildings – SDMC cannot keep sanction of Revised Building Plan submitted by Appellant in abeyance indefinitely – Nor can sanction be rejected on the ground of non-compliance of fire service requirements applicable to multi-storied/high rise buildings – Decision with regard to sanction has to be taken within time stipulated in Clause 2.3.1 of Unified Building Bye-laws by Fire Service Authorities within a maximum period of 15 days. (Paras 91, 92, 93, 94, 95 and 104)
(C) Constitution of India – Article 226 – Writ of Mandamus – Orders in nature of Mandamus directing a rule making authority to amend Rules is not granted by High Court in proceedings under Article 226 of Constitution of India – Challenge to Rule 27(2) of Fire Service Rules was misconceived and High Court rightly rejected challenge to the Rule – High Court rightly refused to pass any such order. (Para 96)
Facts of the case:
Present appeal is against a judgment and order dated 20th January 2016, passed by a Division Bench of the High Court of Delhi, dismissing Writ Petition being W.P.(C) No.1476 of 2014 filed by Appellant, against the failure and/or refusal of South Delhi Municipal Corporation (SDMC) to sanction a revised plan, submitted by the Appellant, in respect of a residential building at C-319, Defence Colony, New Delhi-110024, and seeking consequential reliefs, including orders/directions setting aside Rule 27(2) of Delhi Fire Service Rules 2010 and orders/directions, commanding the Respondents to amend the said rule.
Findings of Court:
SDMC may in its discretion seek clearance from the Fire Service Authority, but such clearance shall not be withheld on the ground of non-compliance of requisites applicable to high rise buildings, or on frivolous ground of unavailability of ladders of adequate size to carry out inspection. If no views are expressed within the time as stipulated in Unified Building Bye-laws and in particular Clause 2.3.3 thereof, computed from the date of communication of this judgment and order, clearance will be deemed to have been granted.
Result : Appeal allowed.
Certainly. Based on the provided legal document, here are the key points summarized with corresponding references:
The rules applicable to High Rise Buildings cannot be extended to buildings that are not classified as High Rise Buildings. The SDMC cannot keep the sanction of the Revised Building Plan in abeyance indefinitely, and decisions regarding sanction must be made within prescribed timelines. (!) (!) (!)
The provisions of the Unified Building Regulations are mandated to be interpreted harmoniously with the Master Plan of Delhi. Any amendments or modifications to the Master Plan automatically become part of the Building Regulations, and all regulations concerning land use, height, and safety standards are interconnected. (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!)
Fire safety regulations, including the requirement for clearance from the Delhi Fire Service, are applicable only to buildings classified as High Rise Buildings, i.e., buildings taller than 15 meters or with four or more upper stories, including mezzanine floors. Buildings that do not meet this classification are not subject to the fire safety clearance mandate, provided they conform to the applicable building bye-laws and standards. (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!)
The amendments to the Master Plan, which increased the permissible height of residential buildings with stilt parking to 17.5 meters, imply that such buildings should not be regarded as high rise or multi-storied for fire safety purposes, especially when the height excluding stilt parking remains below the threshold. Consequently, the classification and regulatory requirements should be read in light of these amendments, and buildings within these height limits should not be subjected to regulations meant for high rise buildings. (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!)
The application for sanctioning or rejecting a building plan must adhere to the timelines specified in the applicable building bye-laws. If the Fire Service or any external authority fails to respond within the stipulated period, the application is deemed to be sanctioned, and the decision must be communicated with reasons if refused. (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!)
The building owner is responsible for ensuring compliance with safety and fire regulations, regardless of the sanctioning process. The owner cannot be relieved of liability for violations and must adhere to the safety standards appropriate for the building’s classification. (!) (!)
The challenge to Rule 27(2) of the Fire Service Rules, which classifies certain residential buildings as likely to cause a fire risk based on height and number of stories, is misconceived when read in conjunction with the Master Plan and building bye-laws. These regulations, including height limits, are intended to be interpreted purposively and harmoniously, considering amendments and specific provisions for parking and height measurement. (!) (!) (!) (!) (!)
The building’s height, including stilt parking, must be measured in accordance with the applicable regulations, which specify that height exceeding 15 meters without stilt or exceeding 17.5 meters with stilt parking should be classified as high rise. When the height remains within these limits, fire clearance and safety regulations applicable to high rises are not mandatory. (!) (!) (!)
The authorities cannot indefinitely delay the approval process or reject a plan solely on the grounds of fire safety clearance if the building does not qualify as a high rise under the applicable regulations. Decisions must be made within the statutory timelines, and reasons for rejection are required if the application is refused. (!) (!)
The regulatory framework, including the Master Plan, Building Bye-laws, and Fire Service Rules, collectively determines the classification and safety requirements for buildings. Any amendments or notifications that clarify or change height classifications should be incorporated into the interpretation of the rules, ensuring that buildings within permissible height limits are not unjustly subjected to high rise regulations. (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!)
These key points reflect the principles, regulatory requirements, and procedural mandates derived from the legal document, emphasizing that buildings not classified as high rise under the current regulations are not subject to the fire safety clearance obligations applicable to high-rise buildings, provided they conform to the relevant height and safety standards.
JUDGMENT :
INDIRABANERJEE J.
Leave granted.
2. This appeal is against a judgment and order dated 20th January 2016, passed by a Division Bench of the High Court of Delhi, dismissing the Writ Petition being W.P.(C) No.1476 of 2014 filed by the Appellant, against the failure and/or refusal of South Delhi Municipal Corporation (SDMC) to sanction a revised plan, submitted by the Appellant, in respect of a residential building at C-319, Defence Colony, New Delhi-110024, and seeking consequential reliefs, including orders/directions setting aside Rule 27(2) of the Delhi Fire Service Rules 2010 and orders/directions, commanding the Respondents to amend the said rule.
3. The High Court, however, directed that the Appellant would be entitled to apply to the SDMC for regularisation of his construction at the premises in question.
4. By a registered deed of conveyance dated 15th January 2013, the Appellant purchased premises No.C-319, Defence Colony, New Delhi110024, with a view to construct a residential building thereat. The Appellant is the owner of the said premises.
5. Soon thereafter, the Appellant applied to the SDMC for sanction of a building plan for construction of a building at the said premises, in accordance with the Development Code of Master Plan and the Building Bye-laws 1983. The height of the building was shown as 15 meters including the stilt, as permissible as per the Building Bye-laws 1983, being the building regulations prevailing at the material time.
6. The building plan submitted by the Appellant was duly sanctioned on 15th July 2013. However about two months later, the Ministry of Urban Development (Delhi Division) amended the Master Plan for Delhi by a notification dated 23rd September 2013, which was published in the Official Gazette on 21st October 2013. Thereafter, the Appellant applied for sanction of a Revised Building Plan. The Revised Building Plan has not been sanctioned.
7. The Delhi Development Act 1957, hereinafter referred to as the “DD Act”, was enacted by Parliament for the development of Delhi, according to plan and for matters ancillary thereto.
8. ‘Building’ is defined in Section 2(b) of the DD Act to include “any structure or erection or part of a structure or erection which is intended to be used for residential, industrial, commercial or other purposes, whether in actual use or not.”
9. Section 2(d) of the DD Act defines ‘development’ as follows:-
“2(d) “development” with its grammatical variations means the carrying out of building, engineering, mining or other operations in, on, over or under land or the making of any material change in any building or land and includes redevelopment.”
10. Some of the relevant provisions of the DD Act are set out hereinbelow for convenience: -
“7. Civic survey of, and master plan for Delhi. -(1) The Authority shall, as soon as may be, carry out a civic survey of, and prepare a master plan for, Delhi.
(2) The master plan shall-
(a) define the various zones into which Delhi may be divided for the purposes of development and indicate the manner in which the land in each zone is proposed to be used (whether by the carrying out thereon of development or otherwise) and the stages by which any such development shall be carried out; and
(b) serve as a basic pattern of frame-work within which the zonal development plans of the various zones may be prepared.
(3) The master plan may provide for any other matter which is necessary for the proper development of Delhi.
***
11-A. Modifications to plan. -(1) The Authority may make any modifications to the master plan or the zonal development plan as it thinks fit, being modifications which, in its opinion, do not effect important alterations in the character of the plan and which do not relate to the extent of land-users or the standards of population density
(7) Any reference in any other Chapter, except Chapter III, to the master
(1) Rules applicable to High Rise Buildings cannot be applied to buildings which are not High Rise Buildings – SDMC cannot keep sanction of Revised Building Plan submitted by Appellant in abeyance in....
The Rules, 1999 are absolutely of technical nature in regard to building construction, and therefore until and otherwise it is established that any of the rule or rules has any sort of technical flaw....
The court upheld that building heights must adhere to regulatory frameworks, enforcing a maximum of 11.5 meters and requiring municipal compliance for construction, protecting the rights of neighbori....
Mandatory adherence to fire safety norms necessitates maintaining appropriate setbacks in high-rise constructions to prevent hazards and ensure emergency access.
The central legal point established in the judgment is the paramount importance of safety, fire safety, and public safety in the context of discretionary powers exercised by the Municipal Commissione....
Height of buildings must be measured excluding basements as per KMB Rules 1999.
The court established that public safety in fire incidents takes precedence over construction rights, necessitating compliance with fire safety regulations before allowing high-rise buildings.
Cancelled permition for construction - Quashment of - As per Rule 56(2) rear open space in back should be 1.5m for building up to 10m height and there shall be an increase of rear open space at the r....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
