Judicial directive for municipal compliance with regularization processes in construction matters.

JUDGMENT

These writ petitions are connected and therefore, I am disposing of these judgments by a common judgment.

2. The prayers in W.P(C) No. 13039/2025 are extracted hereunder :

(I) “Issue a Writ of Mandamus or such other appropriate Writ, Order or Direction, commanding the 1st respondent to remove the unauthorized construction done by the 2nd respondent in compliance of Ext.P6, within such time fixed by this Hon’ble Court.

(II) To dispense with English translation of documents produced in vernacular language (III) Issue such other writ, appropriate Order or Direction as this Hon’ble Court deem fit to the facts and circumstances of the case.” [sic]

3. The main prayer in this writ petition is to issue direction to the 1^st respondent to remove unauthorised construction done by the 2^nd respondent in that case and conclude the proceedings based on Ext.P6 provisional order. The 2^nd respondent in that petition filed W.P.(C.) No. 274/2026. The prayers in W.P.(C) No. 274/2026 are extracted hereunder :

a) “To issue a writ of certiorari or any other writ, order or direction calling for the records leading to the issuance of Exhibit P7 and P8 and quash the same.

b) To issue a writ of mandamus or any other writ, order or direction directing the 3rd respondent to consider and dispose Exhibit P14 in a time bound manner at any rate within a period of one month.

c) To dispense with filing of the English translation of the documents produced in vernacular along with the above writ petition. and d) Any other writ, order or direction as this Hon’ble Court deems fit to grant in the facts and circumstances of the above case.” [sic]

4. The petitioner in that writ petition produced an application for regularisation as evident by Ext.P17.The prayer in the writ petition is that, without considering Ext.P17 regularisation application, the Corporation is proceeding with the demolition notice. After hearing both sides, I am of the considered opinion that this writ petition need not be retained here. Admittedly, the petitioner filed Ext.P17 regularisation application. There can be a direction to consider the regularisation application first and based on the decision in the regularisation application, the Corporation will proceed with Ext.P6 in W.P.(C.) No. 13039/25 in accordance with law.

Therefore, these writ petitions are disposed of with the following directions :

1) The 3^rd respondent in W.P.(C.) No. 274/2026 is directed to consider Ext.P17 and pass appropriate orders in it, after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and also the writ petitioner in W.P.(C.) No. 13039/2025, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within three months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment.

2) Based on the decision in Ext.P17, the 1^st respondent in W.P.(C.) No. 13039/2025 will proceed with Ext.P6 in accordance to law, after giving an opportunity of hearing to both sides.

3) Till final orders are passed in Ext.P17 in W.P.(c.)

No.274/2026,the petitioner in that case should maintain status quo as far as the construction is concerned.

Sd/-