Legal validity of municipal demolition order confirmed; deemed sanction requires strict procedural compliance.

Mr. Sayan Sinha, Mr. Adil Naser, … For respondent nos. 2 to 4 Gaurang Kanth, J.:-

1. The Petitioner, by way of the present writ petition, assails the legality and validity of the demolition order dated 21.10.2024, issued by the Bongaon Municipality in respect of the premises bearing Holding No. 21/A/291/2A, situated at Ratepara Road, Ward No. 10, Bongaon, Plot No. 3966, L.R. Khatian No. 21842, Mouza Bongaon, J.L. No. 116, District North 24 Parganas.

2. It is the case of the Petitioner that he purchased a plot of land measuring approximately 2 cottahs at the aforementioned location by way of a registered sale deed dated 09.10.2021. Subsequent to the said purchase, the land was duly mutated in his name in the records of Bongaon Municipality. The Petitioner avers that he submitted an application on 25.05.2022 seeking sanction to construct a G+4 storied building on the said plot, and thereafter issued a formal reminder on 25.04.2023 requesting early approval of the building plan. It is contended that no decision was taken by the Municipality on the said application within the stipulated period. Accordingly, the Petitioner claims that the building plan stands deemed to have been sanctioned by operation of Section 207 & 208 of the West Bengal Municipal Act, 1993 . Relying upon such deemed sanction, the Petitioner undertook construction on the said premises. However, the Respondent Municipality issued the impugned demolition order dated 21.10.2024 under Section 218 of the West Bengal Municipal Act, 1993 , directing the demolition of the constructed structure on the ground that no valid sanction plan had been granted. Aggrieved thereby, the Petitioner has invoked the jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

3. Mr. Basu, learned senior counsel appearing for the Respondent- Municipality, strenuously opposed the writ petition and submitted that the Petitioner is not entitled to the benefit of the deemed sanction provision under Section 208 inasmuch as no complete or valid application for building plan sanction was ever filed before the Board of Councillors. Drawing the Court’s attention to the purported application form annexed as Annexure P-3 to the writ petition, the learned senior counsel pointed out that although the form bears the date 25.05.2022, it is actually the date on which the application form was issued to the Petitioner. The architect’s certification on the building plan is dated

07.12.2022. Thus, it is evident that the building plan, a mandatory component of a valid application, could not have been submitted on 25.05.2022 as claimed by the Petitioner. Furthermore, the application bears no official seal or endorsement evidencing its receipt by the Municipality.

4. Learned counsel for the Petitioner admitted during the course of hearing that the document annexed is merely a form issued by the respondent- municipality and not the formal application itself. Upon specific query by the Court, learned counsel for the Petitioner failed to point out any document to establish that a duly completed application with all requisite documents was ever filed with or received by the Board of Councillors of the Municipality.

5. The Respondent further submitted that the construction was undertaken by the Petitioner without any approved sanction plan and that a hearing was conducted prior to the issuance of the demolition order. The demolition order was passed by the Board of Councillors following due procedure, and the Petitioner was given ample opportunity to present his case. Hence no judicial intervention is warranted in the present c