The Municipal Commissioner has a statutory duty to ensure the safety of structures within its jurisdiction and to take appropriate action to prevent danger to the public from dilapidated buildings.

Court No. - 39

Case :- WRIT - C No. - 17083 of 2022

Petitioner :- Om Prakash And Another

Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others

Counsel for Petitioner :- Dinesh Mishra

Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Shyam Mani Shukla,Ajeet Singh Rana

Hon'ble Mrs. Sunita Agarwal,J.

Hon'ble Vipin Chandra Dixit,J.

Rejoinder affidavit filed today is taken on record.

The present writ petition is directed against the notice dated

13.5.2022 sent by respondent no.4 under Section 331 of U.P.

Municipal Corporation Act, 1959 (hereinafter referred to as

'Act, 1959'). The copy of the notice is appended at page '17' of

the paper book. A perusal thereof indicates that spot inspection

of the house in question has been conducted by the Executive

Engineer, Nagar Nigam, Agra and on submission of the spot

inspection report, the notice in question has been issued with

the categorical assertion therein that the building in question is

an old building and was made up of reinforced bricks and is

located on the main road in the market area. Certain portions of

the building are in dilapidated condition and are posing danger

to the public life. The house in question has been declared to be

in dilapidated condition based on the said inspection report.

Along with the counter affidavit, the copy of the survey report

is appended at page '19' and '20' of the paper book which is

supported with the photographs and the map of the building in

question. In the map appended with the spot inspection report,

the place marked as 'X' namely House No.6/183 has been

mentioned to be in dilapidated condition. The photographs

appended with the counter affidavit, which were taken during

the course of inspection, also depict the ruinous condition of the

building.

The challenge in the present writ petition to the notice has been

raised without submitting any reply to the same or confronting

the spot inspection report which is the basis of the issuance of

the notice.

We may further record that under Section 331 of the Act, 1959,

a duty cast on the Municipal Commissioner, Nagar Nigam to

make inspection of structures (building, wall, parapet,

pavement, floor, steps, railing, door or window frames or

shutters or roof, or other structure and anything affixed to or

projecting from or resting on, any building, wall, parapet or

other structure) which are in ruinous condition or likely to fall,

or in any way dangerous to any person occupying, resorting to

or passing by such structure or any other structure or place in

the neighbourhood. On the opinion formed by the Municipal

Commissioner that the structure in question is in ruinous

condition or likely to fall or dangerous to the person occupying

it or any other person in the neighbourhood or the public at

large, a written notice is required to be given to owner or

occupier of such structure calling upon him to pull down,

secure, remove or repair, such structure or thing or do one or

more of such things and to prevent all causes of danger

therefrom. Section 331 also provides the procedure, the manner

in which the entire exercise of demolition/repair of the ruinous

structure is to be conducted and the recovery of expenses, if

such an exercise is conducted by the Nagar Nigam.

Noticing the said provisions, we are of the considered view that

it is the statutory duty and obligation of the Nagar Nigam to

ensure that no ruinous structure which is dangerous to the life

of the occupants or the public at large is allowed to be remain in

the area of its jurisdiction.

The challenge to the notice calling upon the petitioners who are

occupiers of the building as tenants and the owner who is

respondent no.5 herein, therefore, cannot be allowed to be

sustained without confronting to the contents of the same by

challenging the spot inspection report.

We, therefore, do not find it a fit case to entertain.

However, liberty is granted to the petitioners herein who claim

to be occupiers of the buildi