Section 345A of the Delhi Municipal Corporation Act, 1957, is not arbitrary and is attracted when an order under Section 343 or 344 can be made. The order under Section 345A is an interim arrangement to prevent further mischief or damage and to prevent the use of the building constructed in violation of the law.

( 1 ) RULE D. B.

( 2 ) THE petitioner, who has admittedly voilated the Building Bye Laws and has constructed a building and completed the same not in accordance with the sanctioned building plans is complaining about the illegality alleged to have been committed by the respondent corporation who is seeking to seal portion of the premises which have been constructed.

( 3 ) BRIEFLY stated the facts are that the petitioner purchased a building E-7, Kailash Colony, New Delhi. This is a residential Colony. The petitioners filed plans for reconstructing on that plot of land. The plans were approved by Corporation and thereafter building was constructed.

( 4 ) ACCORDING to the Corporation Bye Laws after a building is completed the Builder is required to submit completion drawings. The completion drawing are required to indicate the building which actually existed after construction. This is for the reason that there might be some deviation in constructing the building from the sanctioned plans which may have been approved. Prior to construction commenced after the completion drawings are furnished the building is required to be inspected and an occupation or a completion certificate issued.

( 5 ) IN the present case completion drawings were furnished which inter alia showed a full basement hall for domestic storage, residential flats on the ground floor and the first and a barsati floor. The petitioner obtained a completion certificate dated 28. 7. 1989 which indicated the particulars of construction.

( 6 ) THE petitioner thereafter received a notice dated 19. 1. 89 in which it was inter alia stated that the petitioner had constructed partition wall in basement and had made additional coverage at basement floor and ground floor with additions/alterations of partition walls on ground floor as shown in the sketch attached to the said notice.

( 7 ) THE petitioner, by this show cause notice, was required to explain as to why the illegal portion which had been constructed should not be remover. The petitioner then filed the writ petition for restraining the respondents from sealing or causing any interference in the injoyment of the said property. It was alleged that all the irregularities had been compounded by charging compounding fees and neverthless the respondents had come to the premises with a view to seal the same.

( 8 ) AFTER notice to show cause was issued we also directed appointment of a local commissioner to visit the premises in question and give report as to the state of the building. Thereafter no fee was paid to the local commissioner with the result that the commission was not executed. The writ petition was amended and it was admitted in the amended writ petition that the building as constructed was not in accordance with the completion drawing. Nevertheless the challenge in this writ petition is to the provisions of section 345-A of the Municipal Corporation Act which inter alia permits the Corporation to seal the premises under certain circumstances.

( 9 ) THE respondents have filed an affidavit in response to the show cause notice in which it is inter alia stated that the building is constructed in a residential colony and can be used only for residential purpose. A residential building plan had been sanctioned and according to the respondent after the petitioner had obtained occupancy certificate lagre scale addition and alterations have taken place. The petitioner is alleged to have removed the walls of all the rooms shown in the completion report and has erected new partition walls to make shops, on all the floor and in fact there is additional, construction on the Barsati Floor as well. The respondent have also placed on record the report of the local commissioner pertaining to the building in question filed in C. W. 346/1990. As per the report of Shri Manoj Wad, Advocate dated 20. 4. 1990. The basement of this Building consists of 15 flats, all of them single room flats with no kitchen or toilet atta