SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

1978 Supreme(AP) 403

Andhra Pradesh High Court
Godavari Bai Rathi - Appellant
Versus
Municipal Corporation of Hyderabad - Respondent
W. P. 2291/78
Decided On : 12-05-78
Advocates Appeared :
.

Headnote:Hydrabad Municipal Corporation Act, and Building Byelaws of 1972, byelaws 23, 24 and 26 to 28-Refusal of permission for construction of a second floor to a building on the ground of violation of Byelaws 26, 27 and 28 though open space were left at the ground level-Not valid.

       Held: The petitioners having complied with the Byelaws 26, 27 and 28 and left the open space at the ground floor level as required by the Byelaws, the Question of providing further additional open spaces at the second floor would not arise, but the second floor to be constructed by the petitioner should comply with the requirements of Byelaws 25 and 29 and the rooms to be built in second floor should also comply with the requirement of Byelaws 25 and 29. When the ground floor is constructed in conformity with the Byelaws 26, 27 and 28 any floor constructed on such ground floor of the building by raising walls vertically and on a line with the wall of the ground floor, will satisfy the requirement of the Byelaws Nos. 26, 27 and 28 with regard to leaving of open spaces around the building. It is therefore not necessary that at the first floor level and above, again additional open spaces is required by the Byelaws should be provided. If such additional space is required to be left open at the first floor level, it will result in leaving double the space required to be left open by the said Byelaws. Surely, that could not have been the intention of the framers of the Byelaws. The application of Byelaws 23 and 24 need not be restricted to the rooms in the ground floor. There can be no practical difficulty in applying Byelaws 23 and 24, to the first rooms in the first floor and above.

       W. P. allowed.

K. RAMACHANDRA RAO, J.

( 1 ) THIS is an application for the issue of a writ of certiorari calling for the records relating to the order No. 840/2/3/76 dated 19-10-1976 0f the Municipal corporation of Hyderabad and the order in memorandum no. 5865/ k2/ 76-3- MA dated 26-5-1978 of the government of Andhra Pradesh and quashing the same and to direct the 1st respondent to sanction the plan submitted by the petitioners on 25-9-1976 for construction of second floor.

( 2 ) THE relevant facts are as follows: The petitioners are the owners of a building bearing Municipal No. 3-2- 840 in Kachiguda, Hyderabad. The petitioners applied on 7-2-1964 to the commissioner of the 2nd respondent corporation for permission to raise certain constructions. As no orders were communicated, the petitioner commenced construction on 1-4- 1964. When the construction was nearing completion, the 1st respondent issued a noticed calling upon the petitioner to demolish the construction. The petitioner to demolish the construction. The petitioner there upon filed a writ petition W. P. No. 273/65 and the same was allowed by this court on 25-1-1968 holding that the petitioner was entitled under section 437 of the Hyderabad Municipal corporation Act to proceed with the construction, as no communication was received from the corporation within 30 days as required by the Act and that the construction did not contravene any of the provisions of the Act or the Bye-laws. Thereafter, the petitioner completed construction of the ground floor in accordance with the plan submitted by them.

( 3 ) PETITIONERS wanted to raise a first floor on the ground floor for a lodging house and applied on 4-9- 1971 with the plans for constructing the first floor. The 1st respondent called upon the petitioners to submit plans relating to the ground floor, whereupon the petitioners replied on 8-10-97 that the necessary plans were in possession of the corporation and that the ground floor was constructed in accordance with the said plans and as upheld by this court in the judgement in W. P. No. 273/65. On 28-10-1971, the corporation refused permission for construction of the first floor raising some objections. The petitioners thereupon field a writ petition W. P. No. 4803/71 and during the pendency of the writ petition, completed construction of the first floor in Accordance with the plan submitted by them. That writ petition was finally allowed overruling the objections of the corporation and directing the Corporation to sanction the plan on the basis of which the structure was completed. It is started that the first is now being used as Nanda Lodge.

( 4 ) THE petitioners wanted to raise a second floor and accordingly submitted a plan on 25-9-1976 to the Corporation for construction of a building of a commercial nature. On 20-10-1976 the Corporation returned the plans refusing permission on the ground that"the proposed construction violated Building Bye-law Nos. 26 and 23 and no documents of ownership or previous approved plans have been submitted". The petitioners preferred an appeal to the Government and the Government passed an order rejecting permission to the petitioners on the ground that"the relaxation of the Hyderabad Municipal corporation Building Bye- laws 1972 sought for by them are against the land used and that the site is affected by 5 feet as per the master Plan, and that the proposals are also in violation of By-laws 1972". The petitioners thereupon field this writ petition challenging the orders of the corporation and the Government.

( 5 ) SHRI C. P. Sarathy, the learned counsel for the petitioner firstly contended that Bye-laws Nos. 23, 24 and 26 are not applicable to the construction of second floor as held by this court in two judgements one of my learned brother Gangadhara Rao. , J in W. P. No 186 of 1977, D/- 28-9-1977. and another of Chinnappa Reddy, J. in W. P. No. 186 of 1977, D/- 28-9-1977. and as per the circular issued by the corporation on 23-3-2977 and that th











Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

SupremeToday

SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top