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

2023 Supreme(Gau) 1341

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GAUHATI, ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH
DEVASHIS BARUAH, J.
Games Village Residents Welfare Society – Petitioner
Versus
The State of Assam and Others – Respondents
W.P. (C) No. 6251 of 2023
Decided On : 30-11-2023

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioner: A.C. Borbora.
For the Respondents: M.K. Choudhury, S. Bora, R.J. Das, H. Sarman.

The court's decision emphasized the need for evidence and compliance with the Guwahati Metropolitan Development Authority Act, 1985, in cases of unauthorized constructions, while also allowing for equitable considerations in the regularization of certain structures.

Headnote:

Writ Petition - Unauthorized Constructions - Guwahati Metropolitan Development Authority Act, 1985 - Sections 24, 25 - MOU - Common Facilities - Unauthorized Construction of Boundary Wall - Regularization of Temple and Semi-Permanent Shed

Fact of the Case:

The Petitioner Society, a registered society, was given management of Phase-I of a residential township by the Guwahati Metropolitan Development Authority. The society constructed a boundary wall without permission, leading to a dispute with the authority. The authority issued a show cause notice under Sections 87 and 88 of the Guwahati Metropolitan Development Authority Act, 1985, citing unauthorized constructions including the boundary wall, a temple, and a semi-permanent shed. The society filed a writ petition seeking to set aside the authority's order to demolish the unauthorized constructions.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the unauthorized construction of the boundary wall was not supported by evidence and upheld the authority's decision to take appropriate steps. However, the court directed the authority to reconsider the regularization of the temple and semi-permanent shed if the society filed an application within 30 days.

Issues: The main issue was the unauthorized constructions by the Petitioner Society, including the boundary wall, temple, and semi-permanent shed, and the authority's action under the Guwahati Metropolitan Development Authority Act, 1985.

Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the authority's decision to take steps against the unauthorized boundary wall was justified, as there was no evidence of its existence prior to the society's construction. However, the court directed the authority to reconsider the regularization of the temple and semi-permanent shed if the society filed an application within 30 days.

Final Decision: The court disposed of the writ petition, permitting the authority to take steps against the unauthorized boundary wall and directing the authority to reconsider the regularization of the temple and semi-permanent shed if the society filed an application within 30 days.

JUDGMENT :

DEVASHIS BARUAH, J.

1. The instant writ petition is taken up for disposal at the motion stage itself.

2. The Petitioner No. 1 herein is a Society registered under the provisions of the Societies Registration Act, 1860 and the Petitioner Nos. 2 & 3 are members of the said Society. For the sake of convenience, the Petitioner No. 1 herein is referred to as the Petitioner Society. In the year 2006, the Respondent No. 2 i.e. the Guwahati Metropolitan Development Authority had promoted a residential township by constructing multistoried buildings consisting of 700 flats for the Games Village to accommodate the players and officials of the 33rd National Games held in 2007 at Guwahati over a plot of land admeasuring 36.41bighas. In the said Games Village there are in total 25 numbers of towers classified as Block-A and Block-B. In Block-A there are 16 numbers of towers consisting of 7 floors each with four apartments on each floor having three bedroom flats and in Block-B there are 9 numbers of towers consisting of 7 floors each with 4 apartments on each floor which are two bedroom apartments. Out of the said 700 flats, 696 flats were sold to various individual purchasers who conjointly formed the Petitioner Society.

3. It further reveals that there was also a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) dated 31.12.2014 entered into between the Petitioner Society and the Respondent No. 2 whereby various powers, operation and management of the Games Village was entrusted to the Petitioner Society. At this stage, this Court finds it relevant to mention that admittedly, the land in question admeasures 70 bighas. Out of the 70 bighas in 36.41 bighas, constructions were made and this area is hereinafter referred to a Phase-I. In the remaining 33.59 bighas, there was a proposal to construct, which is known as Phase-II.

4. This Court have duly perused the said MOU which have been enclosed to the instant writ petition as Annexure-E. From a perusal of the said MOU, it transpires that the Petitioner Society upon being handed over the management of Phase-1 were to enjoy the right of common facilities, infrastructure developed for the township. However, the Petitioner Society have also to abide by all the Clauses mentioned in the Sale Agreement made with the individual buyers/institutions by the Respondent No. 2 as well as the Bye-Laws of Games Village Residents’ Welfare Society. As per the Clause 4 of the said MOU, the Petitioner Society had agreed to keep the premises as well as all partition walls, sewers, drains, pipes and appurtenances thereto in good tenable conditions and in particular so as to support, shelter and protect all parts of the building in as is where is condition. Clause 5 and 6 of the said MOU relates to certain prohibitions insofar as the members of the Petitioner Society are concerned. Clause 8 of the said MOU stipulates that the Respondent No. 2 shall have the right to put up additional structures/flats and other commercial buildings/facilities in the land as shown in Phase-II area within the Games Village boundary and also renovations/up gradation of facilities existing in the Phase-I at its own cost. The Petitioner Society agreed that they shall not claim on the surplus land and the project development as Phase-II in land of 33.59 bighas. It was also agreed that on construction /completion of Phase-II, the facilities like roads, drainage, sewerage, entrance security etc shall be clubbed together if deemed fit as assessed by the Respondent No. 2. The Petitioner Society further agreed that they shall have no objection to the same. It was however agreed that in taking up the construction works of the Phase-II, the Respondent No. 2 shall however ensure that there is no unwanted and unwarranted interference like vehicular movement etc which may affect the peace and tranquility amongst the residents of Games Village Phase-I. Clause 8 being relevant for the purpose of the dispute is reproduced herein-under:

“8. That the First Party

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

AI

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