IMPORTANT POINT
The necessity of issuing a notice to the owner before demolition under Section 337 of the Guwahati Municipal Corporation Act, 1971, is essential to uphold natural justice.

JUDGMENT :

DEVASHIS BARUAH, J.

1. Heard Mr. S. Chamaria, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Petitioner and Mr. S. Bora, the learned Standing counsel appearing on behalf of the Respondent Nos. 1 to 5.

2. Taking into account the dispute involved in the instant proceedings, this Court is inclined to dispose of the instant writ petition at the motion stage itself.

3. Further to that, in view of the dispute involved, this Court does not find it relevant to issue notice upon the Respondent Nos.6 and proforma Respondent No. 7.

4. From the materials on record, it is seen that the proforma Respondent No. 7 vide a Deed of Sale bearing Deed No. 13352 dated 28.12.2020 had sold a plot of land to the Petitioner herein admeasuring 4.86 Lechas covered by Dag No. 2396 (new) of K.P. Patta No. 860 (new) situated at Revenue Village - Sahar Fatashil under Mouza Beltola within Dispur Revenue Circle in the District of Kamrup (M) Assam.

5. Pursuant to the said sale, it transpires that the Petitioner constructed a commercial shop on the said land which has been assessed by the Guwahati Municipal Corporation as Holding No. 12559420 of Ward No. 6. It further appears that on 09.01.2024, the Assistant Town Planner, Guwahati Municipal Corporation issued a notice to the Tillotoma Apartment along with the proforma Respondent No. 7 in pursuance to a letter received from one Ashok Sharma (Respondent No. 6 herein) alleging illegal construction of commercial shop by the Petitioner. The proforma Respondent No. 7 thereupon replied to the said notice on 19.01.2024 stating inter alia that after completion of the building, he had handed over the building to the Tillotoma Apartment Residential Society and Tillotoma Apartment Commercial Society along with the No Objection Certificate and the Approved Plan of the building to the Tillotoma Apartment Residential Society. It was also mentioned that if the Office of the GMC found that the construction of the building illegal and extremely deviated from the approved plan provided by the GMC, the Office shall opt for demolition of the deviated parts of the apartment if it deem fit. It was however stated that if there is a provision to pay a penalty and regularize the deviated parts of the apartment, the proforma Respondent No. 7 be informed about the same so that the residents of the residential part of the apartment as well as the owners of the commercial shops of the apartment do not have to suffer any kind of loss on their part.

6. Subsequent thereto, the Commissioner of GMC had issued a communication on 26.04.2024 to both the Tillotoma Apartment as well as the proforma Respondent No. 7 stating inter alia that the notice was issued for documents on 09.01.2024 but in response to the notice, no reply have been submitted and as such notice under Sections 337(1) & (2) of the Guwahati Municipal Corporation Act, 1971 (for short “the Act of 1971”) is being prepared. It was further mentioned in the said notice that if there is no valid explanation as demanded and the explanation so submitted is found unsatisfactory, the GMC Authority would be free to proceed under Section 337(3) and 337(A)(1) of the Act of 1971 to demolish/seal the unauthorized construction as mentioned in the Schedule to the said notice. It is very pertinent to take note of the unauthorized construction which was mentioned in the Schedule was a shop in front of the building and not within the building where the permission was granted.

7. To the said notice, the proforma Respondent No. 7 issued a communication that the said shop was constructed not beyond the approved six numbers of shops in the approved plan but admitted that there was deviation in re-alignment of the said shop which may be compassionately allowed by imposing any penalty as provided under law inasmuch as the innocent owner i.e. the petitioner herein had purchased the shop for consideration and would suffer irreparable loss for no fault of his own.

8. It is also seen from the records that the P