This Letters Patent Appeal is directed against the judgment and order of the learned Single Judge dated : 14-2-1991, dismissing the writ petition filed by the Administrator and Executive Officer of the Municipality Jammu against the respondents and up-holding the judgment and order of the J&K Special Tribunal, Jammu dated 15-10-1990 hereinafter referred as Tribunal Jammu.

The facts and circumstances giving rise to the Letters Patent Appeal are briefly given, as under:

The respondent No. 1, a Company incorporated under the Act, for the purposes of constructing a hotel at Residency Road, Jammu, had submitted building plans to Jammu Municipal Authorities for according sanction to the proposed construction. After proper verification and after obtaining "No Objection Certificates" from all concerned, the said plans were sanctioned by the Building permission Committee of Municipality and issued under No. 633 dated 17-3-1987. Allegedly, the Architect engaged by the respondent-Company modified the sanctioned plans to some extent and the same were submitted to Jammu Municipality for sanction. The concerned authorities of the Municipality asked the respondent to submit the modified plans to the Jammu Development Authority (for short JDA). The modified plans were allegedly, cleared by the Chief Town Planner and who sent the same to the Municipal authorities vide his letter No. JDA/BCC/317 dated: 6-11-1987. It is stated that the revised plans remained pending with the Jammu Municipality for more than 120 days, and as such, it was presumed in terms of Sub Section (4) of Section 222 of the Municipal Act, that they have been sanctioned. The respondent, accordingly, proceeded with the construction as per the modified plan. Allegedly, when the construction reached its final stage, and the respondent had already spent more than 1.5 crores, he received a notice from the Khilafwarzi Officer of the Jammu Municipality, bearing No. 1I/KVO/84 dated 15-4-1989, calling upon him to show cause as to why the building raised be not demolished. The said notice was replied to by the respondent. Consequently, the Executive Officer of the Jammu Municipality passed an order on 11-11-1989, bearing No:MJ/175/KVO/89 calling upon the respondent to demolish the building. An appeal came to be filed before the Tribunal Jammu by the respondent, challenging the demolition order of the Executive Officer of Jammu Municipality. During the pendency of appeal, the Tribunal appointed some Commissioners for ascertaining the actual position on the spot as to the violations, if any made. Last of all the Tribunal after taking into account the totality of the circumstances returned the following findings: -

i) The Executive Officer of the Municipality was competent to delegate his powers vested in him under the Act to the Khilafwarzi Officer;

ii) The Chief Town Planner, JDAs letter written to the Executive Officer of the Jammu Municipality was an act performed in the normal course of official duties which carried a presumption in its favour including that of its receipt by the addressee concerned.

iii) The Chief Town Planner was competent to receive Municipal plans and that earlier plans had also been approved by the Municipality only after they were cleared by the said Officer;

iv) The submission of the plans by the Chief Town Planner to the Municipal Authorities would not constitute a notice under sub-section 4 of section 222 of the Municipal Act so as to give rise to the presumption that the plan so submitted stood sanctioned, if not otherwise turned down by a specific order, and

v) The violations alleged by the Municipal Authorities and the digressions from the sanctioned plans reported by the Commissioners did not amount to a major violation within the meaning of the J&K Municipal (Un-authorised Construction) Rules 1977 and, therefore, could be validly compounded.

In consequence of the above noticed findings the Tribunal compounded the violations after holding them as minor™ in n

Click Here to Read the rest of this document