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

2026 Supreme(Cal) 144

IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
RAJA BASU CHOWDHURY, J.
Pramila Shah & Ors. – Petitioners 
Versus
Bidhannagar Municipal Corporation & Ors. – Respondents
WPA 27038 of 2025
Decided On : 12-05-2026

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioners: Mr. Suddhasatva Banerjee, Mr. Shiven Ray, Mr. A. Chakraborty, Mr. S. Mitra, Mr. R.D. Banerjee.
For the Respondents: Mr. Sirsanya Bandopadhyay, Mr. Tirthankar Dey, Mr. Arka Kr. Nag., Mr. Shashwat Nayak, Ms. Akanksha Mukherjee, Ms. S. Chatterjee.

Administrative authorities must distinguish between material and minor deviations when issuing stop-work notices. Judicial review allows for the setting aside of such orders when the construction is substantially compliant with sanctioned plans and addresses essential accessibility needs, despite minor dimensional discrepancies.

Headnote:(A) Writ Jurisdiction - Stop-work notice - Challenges to private construction within gated residential clusters - Alleged deviations from sanctioned plans - Discretionary jurisdiction of the Court. (Paras 1, 4, 12)

(B) Municipal Administration - Authority to issue stop-work notices - Requirement of materiality in deviations - Balancing individual mobility-related needs with community access - Need for reconsideration of administrative orders when deviations are minor. (Paras 5, 12, 13)

Facts of the case:
Petitioners, as residents of a housing cluster, obtained approval from their residential association and subsequent sanction from the local municipal authority for the installation of lifts to address mobility constraints. Construction commenced, but following objections from certain association members, the municipal authority issued a stop-work notice citing unauthorized deviations in the dimensions of the lift pits. The petitioners challenged this notice, asserting that the outer structure conformed to the sanction and that the project was a necessity for elderly occupants.

Findings of Court:
The court observed that the deviations in the lift pit dimensions were minor and did not warrant a total cessation of work. It noted that the association had previously granted approval, and their subsequent shift in position lacked sufficient justification. The court reasoned that the municipal authority should revisit the notice, focusing on substantial compliance rather than inconsequential deviations, and that the necessity of accessibility for residents should be balanced against the concerns of the association members.

Issues: The main issues were whether a stop-work notice arising from minor technical deviations in construction is legally sustainable and whether contractual approvals granted by residential associations can be arbitrarily negated by subsequent management after construction has commenced.

Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that administrative notices resulting in the stoppage of work must be based on significant violations of sanctioned plans. Where deviations are minor and the construction is otherwise authorized, the authority is directed to reconsider the necessity of such intervention, particularly when the underlying project serves essential accessibility needs of the inhabitants.

Result: Stop-work notice set aside; petition allowed with directions for future compliance and regulatory oversight.

Table of Content
1. factual background leading to the initiation of building construction and subsequent stop work notification. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5)
2. examination of competing claims regarding the legality of lift installation and alleged civil deviations. (Para 6 , 7 , 8)
3. judicial assessment of the necessity of accessibility for elderly residents and the propriety of administrative interference. (Para 9 , 10 , 11)
4. the principle that minor deviations in construction do not justify permanent obstruction when prior structural approval exists. (Para 12 , 13)
5. final order directing municipal reconsideration and oversight of construction compliance. (Para 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18)

JUDGMENT :

RAJA BASU CHOWDHURY, J.

1. The present writ petition has been filed, inter alia, challenging the stop work notice dated 8th July, 2025 issued by respondent no. 4 forming annexure P-15 to the instant writ petition whereby the installation of two several lifts at Purbachal Nabarun Co-operative Housing have been stalled.

2. The petitioners are residents and claim to be owners of various residential apartments within a housing cluster named Purbanchal Nabarun Housing Society. The petitioners claim to be facing challenges regarding the age related ailments and other mobility constraints. From the by-laws of the co-operative society and as jointly submitted by the learned advocates for the petitioners and the co-operative society, it would transpire that the co-operative society was formed and registered sometimes on 14th April, 1983. Within co- operative society housing there are in all 11 towers comprising of straight, four storied buildings. Each of the towers have two flats on each floor. At the relevant point of time when the building was constructed no provision was made for construction of lifts. With the passage of time and the petitioners having suffered mobility issues, a decision was taken by the co-operative society to accord permission to the request made by the petitioners for installation of lifts on the terms and conditions appearing in the approval letter dated 16th September, 2023. To morefully appreciate the same, the said letter is extracted hereinbelow:-

“To

Mr. Santosh Kumar Das

Convenor

Lift Committee

Purbachal Nabarun Co-Op. Hsg. Society Ltd.

Salt Lake, Kolkata-700097

Sub: Approval for installation of lift

Sir,

With reference to your letter dated 27.08.2023 the Board hereby accords its approval for installation of Lift in the building blocks on the basis of consent given by intending members. This approval of the Board is subject to strict compliance of the terms and conditions laid down herein.

TERMS & CONDITIONS:

1) Submission of the sanctioned plan and structural drawing prepared by a certified Architect of the Bidhannagar Municipal Corporation (BMC).

All expenses for the project installation, maintenance and protection of the machinery will be that of the Lift Committee/actual users. The Lift Committee must ensure that the actual users comply with the all requirements in this behalf. Purbachal Nabarun Co-Op.Housing Society Ltd. or its Board will have no say in the matter.

2) It must be strictly ensured that no structural damage is caused to the building blocks with annexation of the Lift, now or in future and if at all there is any such instance, the Lift Committee will be entirely responsible for due repair of the same and all expenses connected therewith. Such repairs should be immediate to protect the buildings.

3) All the utilities that are underground such as the sewerage line, water line, electricity ducts, telephone cables, pit-holes etc. should be duly protected with no disturbance to them.

4) Existing car or scooter parking or travelling paths/walking path must. not be blocked/damaged by the construction material. The existing gardens must not be destroyed by the construction material. All waste material, during the execution of the Lift Project, must be disposed off outside the boundary walls of Cluster-1. No ifts related ma

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
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