Back
2000 Supreme(Guj) 471
Gujarat High Court
Judgename :B.C.PATEL, D.M.Dharmadhikari
GIRISH MISTRY CHAIRMAN INDIAN INSTITUTE OF ARCHITECTS - Appellant
Versus
STATE - Respondent
S.C.A.1111 of 1999
Decided On : 06/20/2000
Headnote:Constitution of India, 1950 - Art. 226 - Public Interest Litigation - Architect Act, 1972 (Central Act 20 of 1972) - Secs. 37, 35 and 2(a) to 2(e) - Gujarat Housing Board Act, 1961 - Housing Board published advertisement in English daily for empanelment of Architectural consultant - Prequalification - Architectural consultancy firm for project one mark for one year of experience - Grant of contract to respondent No. 3 - No proper publication - Held, the decision taken by Board for empanelment is bad - The contract grant to respondent No. 3 is also quashed and set aside.
The decision taken by the Board for preparing panel is bad in law and it must be quashed and set aside. The decision of the Board must be quashed and set aside on the ground that respondent No. 3 is not an architectural consultancy firm. In view of the provisions contained in Architects (Professional Conduct) Regulations, 1989 the Board has committed a serious error in accepting the application. The decision of the Board is also required to be quashed and set aside on the ground that it has deprived others who were similarly situated like respondent No. 3. If in the advertisement, the Board would have made it clear that the association of persons of firm consisting of the architects and engineers can apply then possibly no injustice could be said to have been done. The petition is thus required to be allowed. As a result, inclusion of respondent No. 3 in the panel of Architectrual Consultancy Firms is not in accordance with law. Respondent No. 3 cannot be identified as a firm of architects. The agreement entered into between Gujarat Housing Board and respondent No. 3 on the basis that respondent No. 3 is a firm of architects, which in fact is not, is hereby quashed and set aside.
[Para 31]
( 1 ) BY way of this Public Interest Litigation the petitioner, the Chairman of the Indian Institute of Architects, Gujarat Chapter, Ahmedabad, has moved this court for quashing and setting aside the agreement entered into between the respondent, Gujarat Housing Board and respondent No. 3 Sandip and Prerak Associates claiming to be the reputed Architectural Consultancy Firm.
( 2 ) SHORT facts which are relevant to dispose of this petition are as under:
( 3 ) THE Architects Act, 1972 (hereinafter referred to as `the Architects Act) has been enacted by the Parliament which provides for Council of Architects, President and Vice-President of Council, Finances of Council, Recognition of qualifications granted by authorities in India, Recognition of architectural qualifications granted by authorities in foreign countries, effect of recognition, Minimum standard of architectural education and Professional conduct etc. Chapter III refers to Registration of Architects. Chapter III provides for preparation and maintenance of register, qualification for entry in register, procedure for subsequent registration, removal from register, procedure in inquiries relating to misconduct, effect of registration. In Chapter IV provisions are made including that of prohibition against use of title and cognizance of an offence.
( 4 ) ACCORDING to the Architects Act, an architect is a person whose name is for the time being entered in the register. Person possessing minimum standard of architectural education required for granting qualifications by Institutions in India can be enrolled as an architect in the register maintained under the Act. It is for the Council to prescribe minimum standard of architectural education. Section 37 of the Architects Act prohibits use of title unless he is a registered architect. Section 37 of the Architects Act being relevant is reproduced hereunder:-"prohibition against use of title - (1) After the expiry of one year from the date appointed under sub-section (2) of Section 24, no person other than a registered architect, or a firm of architects shall use the title and style of architect:provided that the provisions of this section shall not apply to (A) practice of the profession of an architect by a person designated as a "landscape architect" or "naval architect"; (B) a person who, carrying on the profession of an architect in any country outside India, undertakes the function as a consultant or designer in India for a specific project with the prior permission of the Central Government. EXPLANATION - for the purposes of claus (a) - (i) "landscape architect" means a person who deal with the design of open spaces relating to plants, trees and landscape; (II) "naval architect" means an architect who deals with design and construction of ships. (2) If any person contravenes the provisions of sub-section (1), he shall be punishable on first conviction with fine which may extend to five hundred rupees and on any subsequent conviction with imprisonment which may extend to six months or with fine not exceeding one thousand rupees or with both. "
( 5 ) FROM the aforesaid provisions it is clear that a firm of architects can use title if all the partners are architects and not otherwise. For a firm which is introducing itself as a firm of architects, all its partners must be architects under the Act. If a person is not an architect, he cannot be introduced as a partner to the firm of architects and such person cannot be introduced as an architect. Like the legal profession, medical profession and Chartered Accountants, for the architects, Architects Act prescribes qualification, entry of name in the register, removal of name from the register and procedure in inquiries relating to misconduct. The legislature considering the fact that the architects are engaged in profession and not in business, has enacted the Architects Act with a view to maintain standards of architects and to protect the dignity of architects
