ORDER :

Javed Iqbal Wani, J.

In the instant petition, the petitioner on the foundation of the case set up implores for the following reliefs: -

(i) Certiorari for the quashment of the order No. 01/BS/2014, dated 24.04.2014 issued by the respondent No. 3 as the same has been issued by the respondent No. 3 in an illegal, arbitrary and malafide manner.

(ii) Declaring that the building permission in respect of the building namely Gopal Bhawan situated at Kachi Chhowni, Jammu is deemed to be accorded to the petitioner by the respondents.

(iii) Prohibiting the respondents including their employees and agents from interfering in the peaceful execution of development, renovation, strengthening and construction work of the property namely Gopal Bhawan situated at Kachi Chhowni, Jammu as per the proposed plan.

2. The background facts as stated in the petition, under the cover of which the petitioner claims the aforesaid reliefs are that the petitioner claims to have purchased commercial property namely “Gopal Bhavan,” situated at Kachi Chhowni, Jammu in an auction on 12.02.2009 for an amount of Rs. 1,51,00,000/- (Rupees One Crore Fifty One lacs only) after its auction had been ordered by the High Court.

3. It is being stated that the petitioner after taking over the possession of the property in question upon its purchase, the petitioner applied to the respondent No. 2 for grant of building permission in terms of Section 4 of the J&K Control of Building Operations Act, 1988 (for short the Act).

4. It is being stated that the respondent No. 2 did not consider and accord permission to the petitioner within the stipulated period of time in accordance with the regulation 7 of the J&K Control of Building Operations Regulations Act, 2001 (for short the Regulations).

5. It is being stated that the petitioner while completing all requisite formalities in this regard, also deposited requisite fee for building permission of Rs. 1,49,065/- (Rupees One Lakh Forty Nine Thousand and Sixty Five Only) on 12.03.2011 with the respondents besides an amount of Rs. 6,000/- (Rupees Six Thousands Only) on 12.03.2011 itself for malba security against proper receipts.

6. It is being stated that feeling aggrieved of non-consideration and disposal of the permission case of the petitioner by the respondents, the petitioner intended to undertake constructional activities in view of Regulation 7(iii) on the ground that the permission is deemed to have been granted and that the respondents, however, did not allow the petitioner to start the construction work.

7. It is being stated that on account of non-consideration and non-disposal of the building permission case of the petitioner and the inaction of not allowing the petitioner to undertake constructional activities, the petitioner filed OWP No. 474/2013 before this Court which came to be disposed of on 25.10.2013 in presence of the counsel for the respondents directing the respondent authority to take a decision on the petitioners proposal in accordance with law, rules, regulations and Master Plan reserving a right for the petitioner to seek appropriate remedy in the event cause arises.

8. It is being stated that despite passing of the order dated 25.10.2013by this Court, the respondents did not carry out the directions contained therein compelling the petitioner to file contempt petition No. 08/2014 in response to which the respondents filed statement of facts along with copy of order dated 24.04.2014 impugned in the instant petition.

9. The impugned order dated 24.04.2014 is being challenged in the instant petition inter alia on the following grounds: -

a. That the order impugned has been issued by the respondent No. 3 in an illegal, arbitrary and malafide manner. On this ground alone the order impugned requires to be quashed by this Hon’ble Court.

b. That as mentioned above petitioner deposited the requisite building permission fees to the tune of Rs. 1,49,065/- (Rupees One Lakh Forty Nine Thousand and Sixty Five