( 1 )

wp2909.01

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD

WRIT PETITION No. 2909 OF 2001

Practicing Architects Association

..

Petitioner

of Marathwada

Through its President

Shyam Ramchandra Borawake,

Age-55 yeas, Occu-Architect,

R/o. New Osmanpura, Aurangabad,

Dist. Aurangabad.

Versus

1.

Union of India,

..

Respondents

Ministry of Human Resource Development,

Through its Secretary,

Government of India,

Shastri Bhavan,

New Delhi-110 001.

2.

Ministry of Urban Development

& Poverty Alleviation,

Through its Secretary,

Government of India,

Nirman Bhawan,

New Delhi-110 001.

3.

Bureau of Indian Standards,

Through its Director General

Manak Bhawan,

9, Bahadur Shah Zafar Marg,

New Delhi-110 002.

4.

State of Maharashtra

( 2 )

wp2909.01

5.

The Urban Development Department,

Government of Maharashtra,

Through its Secretary, Mantralaya,

Mumbai-400 032.

6.

Municipal Corporation of Aurangabad

Through its Commissioner,

Aurangabad.

7.

The Director / Dy. Director,

Municipal Administration,

Aurangabad Region,

Division Commissioner Office,

Aurangabad.

8.

The Council of Architecture,

Through its President,

Core 6-A, Ist Floor,

Indian Habitate Centre,

Lodhi Road,

New Delhi-110 003.

..

Respondent

Mr.P.G.Deshmukh, Advocate h/f Mr. H.A. Joshi, Advocate

for the petitioner.

Mr.K.S.Patil, AGP for Respondent No.4,5 & 7,

Mr.S.N. Pagare, Advocate for the Respondent No. 6.

Mr.Sushant V.Dixit, Advocate for Respondent No.8.

CORAM

:

A.V. NIRGUDE &

V.L. ACHLIYA,JJ.

RESERVED ON

:

11.11.2014

PRONOUNCED ON :

22.12.2014

( 3 )

wp2909.01

J U D G M E N T : [PER : A.V. NIRGUDE,J.]:-

1.

Heard learned Counsel for the parties.

2.

The petitioner is a registered society/

association of qualified Architects. The members of the

petitioners are registered Architects with Council of

Architecture, New Delhi, a statutory regulatory body

constituted under the Architects Act, 1972. Section 35

(2) of the Architects Act, 1972 stipulates that an

Architect registered with the Council should get

preference for appointment as an Architect under the

Central or State Government or any other local body

supported or aided from public fund. Section 37(1) of

the Act prohibits the persons other than registered

Architects to use the title and style of Architect. It

is the case of the petitioner that the authorities

engaged in housing and construction activities like Urban

Development Authority, Housing Board, Municipal

Corporation, Municipalities permit the persons who are

not Architects, such as Civil Engineers, Draftsmen,

Surveyor etc. to provide their services to developers of

the properties. The petitioner quoted an example of

Bylaw No.6.4 of Aurangabad Municipal Corporation Building

Bylaws. A copy of the Bylaws is annexed to the petition

at page No.22. The purpose of the Bylaws is to provide

( 4 )

wp2909.01

rules regarding qualification of licensed technical

personnel for preparation of schemes for building permit

and supervision. The Bylaws further provide essential

qualification for licensed technical personnel such as

Architects, Engineers, Supervisors, Structural Engineers

etc. The Bylaws, however, permit the Architects,

Engineers, Supervisors to submit “all plans and related

information connected with building permit”. This

permission given to technical personnel other than

architects according to the petitioner is illegal and in

violation of provisions of Section 35 (2) of the

Architects Act.

3.

We heard submissions on the subject from all

sides, but we are not able to accept the contentions of

the petitioner. On careful perusal of Bylaw No.6.4, one

would find that the qualification of different technical

personnel such as Architects, Engineers, Supervisors etc.

are different. Even the competence of these personnel are

different. An Architect is