Rajiv Roy, J. – Heard Mr Rajesh Kumar, learned Counsel for the petitioner as also Mr Prasoon Sinha, who represents the Patna Municipal Corporation as also Ms. Rashmi Ranjan Bhushan for the State.

2. The present petition has been preferred for the grant of following reliefs: –

(i) to issue an appropriate order/direction for quashing of the order dated 11.9.2015 passed by the Municipal Appellate Tribunal, Patna Division, Patna in Appeal No.130/2014 (arising out of Vigilance Case No.77A/13) by which the appeal of the petitioner (against the order passed by the Municipal Commissioner dated 25.11.2014 by which the sanctioned plan earlier granted has been withdrawn and declared the construction of 3rd 4th, 5th and 6th floor of the building in question illegal with further direction made to demolish the same along with various other directions) has not been interfered and with only modification to condone the permissible deviation as per the bylaws;

(ii) to issue an appropriate order/direction for quashing of the order dated 25.11.2014 passed by the respondent Municipal Commissioner, Patna Municipal Corporation in Vigilance Case No.77A/13 by which the sanction earlier granted vide Plan Case No.P/Masalhapur/PRN/7-761/08 dated 2.2.2009 by it for the construction of G+6 building namely ‘Maheshwari Manas Plaza’, Saidpur Nahar Road, Patna has been withdrawn and has further declared the 3rd, 4th, 5th and 6th floor of the building in question as illegal and directed to demolish the same and with direction to the PESU to disconnect the electric connection and/or to the Registrar not to register any part of the building etc;

(iii) to hold and declare that the impugned order of cancellation of the sanctioned plan and direction for demolition of the said floor along with the other directions are wholly without jurisdiction and in violation of principles of natural justice as also contrary to the provision of law;

(iv) to issue an appropriate order/direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondent authorities not to disturb the petitioner in completing the construction of the building in question as the same is in accordance with the sanctioned plan so issued with minor permissible deviation.

3. The matrix of facts giving rise to the present writ application is/are as follows.

4. The petitioner-company represented through its Director, Firoz Ahmad is registered with the Company's Act, 1956. Earlier, one of its erstwhile Director, Mahesh Kumar had entered into development agreement with Ram Tawakya Sharma on 09.05.2008 relating to a property in question situated at Mohalla-Mushallahpur, Pargana Azimabad, Police Station - Pirbahore, District-Patna for the construction of ‘Maheshwari Manas Plaza’ (Annexure-1 to the petition).

5. Accordingly, plan was submitted before the Patna Municipal Corporation (henceforth for short ‘the PMC) which granted permission for G+6 construction of building vide Plan Case No. P/Mushalapur/PRN/7-761/08 dated 02.02.2009 (Annexure 2 to the petition).

6. The petitioner-company had shown the width of the road as 22.62 meter which included two parallel roads divided by an open ‘nala’, It is the case of the petitionercompany that the Draftsman prepared the plan, the ‘Amin’ checked the same on ground, was approved by the Junior Engineer as also the Assistant Engineer of the Patna Municipal Corporation (henceforth for short ‘the PMC’) and only thereafter, the plan was sanctioned by the Executive Engineer.

7. However, a Vigilance Case Number 77A/13 was initiated against the petitioner-company on the basis of a measurement taken by the authorities on 14.09.2013 pursuant to the order passed by the Division Bench of this Court in Narendra Mishra vs State of Bihar (CWJC No. 8152 of 2013

[: 2014 (4) BLJ 210]) in which it was recorded that the width of the road is between 5.20 meter to 4.95 meter with further note that an open ‘nala’ was also included in the sanctioned map thus stretching the width of the road between 22.26 meter to