Unnecessary to demand revised building plan excluding unused block if petitioners undertake construction only in approved blocks.

ORDER

The petitioners assail the order dated 17.04.2026 issued by the fifth respondent, whereby the petitioners have been called upon to submit a revised building plan excluding the land area earmarked as ‘N’ Block.

2.The petitioners, intending to construct a multi-storeyed apartment complex, initially submitted an application to the second respondent for approval of the building plan comprising 14 blocks. The second respondent granted approval for construction of the apartment complex, and the fifth respondent also accorded approval for the said building plan.

3.The petitioners, however, constructed only 10 blocks and did not undertake construction in respect of the remaining four blocks, namely, J, K, L, and N. Since the earlier approval had lapsed by efflux of time, the petitioners submitted a fresh application to the first respondent seeking approval in respect of the remaining four blocks.

The first respondent granted technical approval on 03.10.2025.

4.Pursuant thereto, the petitioners submitted a fresh application to the fifth respondent for sanction of the building plan in respect of the remaining blocks, namely, J, K, and L , N (renumbered as Blocks 10, 11, 12 and 13). However, upon inspection, the fifth respondent found that construction had already been carried out in Block N (renumbered as Block 13) and, accordingly, issued the impugned order directing submission of a revised plan excluding the land area in ‘N’ Block.

5.Heard the learned counsel appearing on either side.

6.The petitioners have undertaken that they will carry out construction only in Blocks J, K, and L and not in Block N. In such circumstances, the insistence on submission of a fresh building plan excluding the land area earmarked for Block N is unnecessary. It would suffice if the fifth respondent considers the application of the petitioners confining the same to Blocks J, K, and L, excluding Block N.

7.In view of the above, the impugned communication issued by the fifth respondent is liable to be set aside.

8.Accordingly, this writ petition is allowed and the impugned order dated 17.04.2026 in Na.Ka.No. F1/0620/2026 issued by the fifth respondent is set aside. The fifth respondent is directed to reconsider the application submitted by the petitioners for sanction of the building plan in respect of Blocks J, K, and L. If the petitioners satisfy all the requisite criteria, the fifth respondent shall grant sanction for the said blocks. The entire exercise shall be completed within a period of eight (8) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.