This writ application has been filed on behalf of the petitioner for quashing the order dated 01.02.2010 as contained in Annexure-9 by which the Municipal Commissioner, Patna has allowed the deviation in the plan of Saket Galaxy Apartment by imposing a cost for the deviation as well as allowing the post facto sanction with respect to four flats constructed by the respondent no. 5.

2. The disputed building known as Saket Galaxy Apartment is situated at Anandpuri having 32 apartments. The petitioner is the owner of one of the apartments. The map of the apartment in question was sanctioned by the erstwhile Patna Regional Development Authority on 27.11.2000.

3. Before going any further with the order, I would like to refer to an order passed by this Court at the initial stage of hearing. It was submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the builder/respondent no. 5 had made an application for fresh sanction of a plan, seeking condonation to make construction on what was shown as common area and the parking area in the erstwhile sanction plan. It was contended that the construction work was being carried out in pursuance of the impugned order on a day-to-day basis. The Court ordered that till final disposal of the writ application, respondent no. 5 should be restrained from carrying out or making any further constructions, repairs, finishing work etc. under the sanction order dated 01.02.2010 (Annexure-9). The Court, therefore, directed that no sooner the present order is served on the Officer-in-charge of Krishnapuri Police Station, he shall forthwith proceed to carry out the videography of the construction in presence of the Executive Officer of the Patna Regional Development Authority. Copy of the C.D. was to be handed over to the petitioner, the Executive Officer and one copy was to be retained by the Officer-in-charge concerned. Leave was also granted to respondent no. 5 to pray for a copy of the C.D. This order of the Court resulted in certain follow up action, which will be discussed in the later part of this order.

4. While I was hearing the matter on the basis of the submissions made on behalf of the petitioner and the order passed by this Court on 26.04.2011, this Court appointed Mr. Ram Kishore Singh and Mr. Nadim Seraj, Advocates on behalf of the Court as Commissioners to examine the four flats which were supposed to have been constructed recently, a report of which is annexed with the record of this case. The report reveals that the Advocate Commissioners made an inspection of the building concerned from outside as the apartment was locked by Shri Uday Kumar, Care Taker of Saket Galaxy Apartment as well as by the Police (Local Police Station). On inspection, they found that there was no doubt about the fact that the building in question was at least ten years old. There were no signs of recent construction. The paintings on the four flats as well as the apartment were the same, the windows, iron grills etc. were also identical to the rest of the flats. It would thus appear that the four flats on the ground floor were constructed along with the main building.

5. Having settled this dispute and the submissions which turned out to be false that a fresh building is being constructed on the plot of land on which Saket Galaxy Apartment stands, this Court will now consider the grievances of the petitioner, the materials on record to conclude as to whether the plan for the four flats was sanctioned by the Patna Regional Development Authority.

6. The petitioner along with the owners of the other 31 flats have formed an association known as Saket Galaxy Owners Association, which was registered vide registration no. 2016 of 2009-10.

7. The main grievance of the petitioner is that after completion of the building when the 32 flat owners were handed over possession of the flats, the builder deviated from the original plan. It is further submitted that the flat owners gave an application to the Superintendent of Police, Patna. It is