The court upheld the Tribunal's decision to compound minor construction violations, emphasizing the importance of administrative finality in factual disputes and limiting high court intervention.

JUDGEMENT

1. The Building Operations Controlling Authority, Municipal Area, Jammu, through its Commissioner along with Joint Commissioner (A), Jammu Municipal Corporation, Jammu, has invoked the extraordinary writ jurisdiction of this court enshrined in Article 226 of the Constitution seeking a writ of Certiorari for quashing order dated 10.7.2020 (for short the impugned order) passed by J&K Special Tribunal/respondent 2 herein (for short the Tribunal) in appeal titled as "Shri Vikas Gupta versus Joint Commissioner (A)”.

2. The background facts under the shade and cover of which the instant petition has been filed would reveal that the respondent 1 herein while possessing a plot of land measuring 3637 sft. situated at Ambedkar Chowk (Panama Chowk), Jammu, came to be granted permission for raising commercial construction by the petitioner 1 herein in terms of Order no. 1102/BS/2010, dated 24.11.2010.

3. The respondent 1 herein in the process of raising the commercial construction under and in terms of order dated 24.11.2010 committed violations of the same as also of the rules and byelaws, resulting into issuance of a show-cause-notice dated 01.2.2012 under and in terms of section 7(1) of J&K Control of Building Operations Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as the Act of 1988) calling upon the respondent 1 herein to show cause as to why the violations detailed out in the notice be not demolished.

4. The respondent 1 filed reply to the aforesaid show-cause-notice, and dissatisfied with the said reply the petitioners herein issued order of demolition dated 28.2.2012 under and in terms of section 7(3) of the Act of 1988.

5. Aggrieved of the demolition order dated 28.2.2012 the respondent 1 herein preferred statutory appeal before the Tribunal/respondent 2 herein contending therein that the said order is without jurisdiction, arbitrary and illegal having been issued without application of mind after the completion of the construction in question though the petitioners herein did not object to the raising of the said construction and in fact allowed the respondent 1 herein to complete the same and only after the completion of the construction they initiated demolition process overlooking the fact that a certificate regarding the completion of the construction of the building strictly in accordance with site plan had been issued by the petitioners herein.

6. The Tribunal after inviting objections to the said appeal from the petitioners herein considered and decided the same in terms of the impugned order dated 10.07.2020 holding that there has been no violation committed by the appellant/respondent 1 herein of the zoning regulations and the Master Plan of the city or a violation falling under major category and that since the construction had been raised and completed within the full knowledge of the petitioners herein, as such, the Tribunal consequently ordered compounding of the violations for 1897 sft. at the rate of Rs. 100/- per sft. giving liberty to the petitioners herein to demolish the deviated portion of the structure in the event the respondent 1 herein fails to deposit the compounding fee.

7. The impugned order is challenged in the instant petition on the grounds urged by the petitioners herein.

8. Objections to the petition have been filed by the respondent 1 resisting and controverting the contentions raised and grounds urged by the petitioners in the petition inter alia on the premise that though the petitioners herein were in know of the fact of completion of the construction raised by the answering respondent yet issued notice under section 7(1) of the Act of 19