SHEIKH NOOR ALAM Vs. GUWAHATI METROPOLITAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) With the help of this writ petition, made under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has put to challenge the orders, dated 23.03.2004 and dated 08.01.2006, issued by Chief Executive Officer, Guwahati Metropolitan Development Authority (hereinafter referred to as 'GMDA'), Bhangagarh, Guwahati, whereby the permission, accorded to the petitioner for construction of building, stands revoked and the petitioner has been directed to demolish the unauthorized construction.

(2.) The petitioner, in this writ petition, has averred that he is the owner and possesor of a plot of a land measuring 2 kathas 2 lechas, out of the total land measuring 4 kathas, covered by Dag Nos. 2962 and 2963 of K.P. Patta No. 773, situated at Sahar Sarania, Part-II, of Ulubari Mouza and, as the owner and possessor of the said plot of land, he (petitioner) applied, on 09.08.2001, to the GMDA seeking permission to erect an RCC building for commercial purpose. It is the contention of the petitioner that, later on, he changed his plan and, accordingly, applied to the GMDA seeking permission for construction of a residential building and the respondents/authorities concerned, on being satisfied, issued a 'No Objection Certificate' (NOC), dated 14.11.2002, permitting construction of a residential building on the petitioner's said plot of land. By the impugned order, dated 23.03.2004, the respondent No. 2 has, however, revoked the NOC, dated 14.11.2012, whereby the permission for construction of a residential building had been issued in favour of the petitioner and declared the construction of the building as unauthorized one. It is the petitioner's further case that thereafter, vide letter, dated 01.01.2004, the respondent/authorities concerned issued a Show-Cause Notice to the petitioner asking him to show cause, if any, as to why legal action shall not be taken against unauthorized construction and for submitting false documents to obtain NOC. In response to the notice of show cause, so issued, the petitioner submitted, on 06.01.2004, his reply denying the allegations levelled against him. However, another notice, dated 26.09.2005, was issued to the petitioner by the respondents/authorities concerned, directing the petitioner to stop the unapproved construction and to show cause as to why the building, constructed without necessary approval, shall not be demolished. The petitioner submitted his reply to the later notice too. But, vide the impugned order, dated 08.01.2006, the petitioner has been directed to demolish the unauthorized construction. It has also been averred by the petitioner, in his writ petition, that though the order for demolition of the petitioner's building was shown to have been passed on 08.01.2006, the same had not been served upon the petitioner and a photostat of the said notice was served, on the petitioner, only on 29.09.2007. The petitioner's contention is that after having obtained valid permission from the authority concerned for construction of his RCC building, he (petitioner) had started the construction and the construction of the building also was as per the approved plan, that he had never contravened the Master Plan orthe Zoning Regulations, that he had completed construction of his RCC building within the time stipulated and permitted for the purpose and, therefore, the respondent No. 2 had no power to issue order of revocation of the permission, once granted, on any ground other than violation of the Rules and Regulations prescribed pursuant to the power conferred on the authorities concerned by the Guwahati Metropolitan Development Authority Act, 1985 (in short 'the 1985 Act'). Moreover, the petitioner was not given any opportunity of being heard before revocation of the said permission, granted to him, which is contrary to the provisions of section 87 of the 1985 Act.

(3.) Controverting the averments of the petitioner, respondent No. 1 and 2 have filed their affidavit-in-opposition, their case being, in brief, thus: