SUSHAMA Vs. COLLECTOR NAGPUR DISTRICT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Rule, with the consent of the parties, made returnable forthwith and heard.

(2.) The above writ petition filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, takes exception to the order dated 28.01.2011 passed by the Collector, Nagpur by which the application filed by the petitioner herein invoking section 308 of the Maharashtra Municipal Councils, Nagar Panchayat and Industrial Townships Act, 1965 came to be disposed of by observing that the Offset Printing Machine, which is supposed to be used by the respondent no.3 is within 5 HP s which is the permissible limit in terms of the N.O.C. granted by the respondent no. 2 Municipal Council.

(3.) The issue raised in the application is whether in the residential area a N.O.C. could be granted by the respondent no.2 Municipal Council to the respondent no.3 to run an Offset Printing Machine. It appears that the respondent no.3 applied for running Offset Printing Machine in the residential premises at Warispura Ward, Tq. Kamptee, Dist. Nagpur. The Municipal Council in terms of the procedure applicable invited objections and suggestions from the members of the public on 07.07.2009 pursuant to which the petitioner herein, who is one of the neighbours, objected to the permission being granted. After considering the said objection the Municipal Council respondent no.2 issued N.O.C. on 09.04.2010 inter alia on the terms and conditions mentioned therein, which are reproduced in the impugned order at page 19 & 20 of the paper book. There are seven conditions imposed by the respondent no.2 Municipal Council amongst which is a condition that the Offset Printing Press should be within 5 HP. Aggrieved by the said N.O.C. granted by the respondent no.2 Municipal Council the petitioner invokes section 308 of the Maharashtra Municipal Councils, Nagar Panchayat and Industrial Townships Act, 1965 against the grant of the said N.O.C. In his application it was the contention of the petitioner that considering the fact that the area was a residential zone such a permission could not have been granted in terms of the building bye laws which are applicable to the respondent no.2 Municipal Council. It was further the contention of the petitioner that the Offset Printing Press was having more power than the 5 HP which was prescribed and it was in fact 9.5 HP.