No Trade License Or Loans For Illegal Buildings; Officers Liable For Wrong Completion Certificates: Supreme Court Issues Directions
The Supreme Court has issued a set of guidelines to curb unauthorised constructions. The Court said that these directions are in addition to the directions issued in an earlier case regarding the demolition of structures.
The bench comprising Justices JB Pardiwala and R. Mahadevan directed that it would be mandatory for the builder to display the approved plan during the period of construction, and no building completion certificate be issued unless the officer inspecting the building is satisfied that the building is constructed as per the building planning permission. Moreover, the Court directs departmental actions against the erring officials who grants wrongful building permission in violation of the law.
The directives issued re-affirms the principle that unauthorized construction cannot be allowed to flourish and send a warning to the erring officials who permitted unauthorized construction in violation of the law.
In the public interest, the Court issued the following directions: -
"(i) While issuing the building planning permission, an undertaking be obtained from the builder/applicant, as the case may be, to the effect that possession of the building will be entrusted and/or handed over to the owners/beneficiaries only after obtaining completion/occupation certificate from the authorities concerned.
(ii) The builder/developer/owner shall cause to be displayed at the construction site, a copy of the approved plan during the entire period of construction and the authorities concerned shall inspect the premises periodically and maintain a record of such inspection in their official records.
(iii) Upon conducting personal inspection and being satisfied that the building is constructed in accordance with the building planning permission given and there is no deviation in such construction in any manner, the completion/occupation certificate in respect of residential / commercial building, be issued by the authority concerned to the parties concerned, without causing undue delay. If any deviation is noticed, action must be taken in accordance with the Act and the process of issuance of completion/occupation certificate should be deferred, unless and until the deviations pointed out are completely rectified.
(iv) All the necessary service connections, such as, Electricity, water supply, sewerage connection, etc., shall be given by the service provider / Board to the buildings only after the production of the completion/occupation certificate.
(v) Even after issuance of completion certificate, deviation / violation if any contrary to the planning permission brought to the notice of the authority immediate steps be taken by the said authority concerned, in accordance with law, against the builder / owner / occupant; and the official, who is responsible for issuance of wrongful completion /occupation certificate shall be proceeded departmentally forthwith.
(vi) No permission /licence to conduct any business/trade must be given by any authorities including local bodies of States/Union Territories in any unauthorized building irrespective of it being residential or commercial building.
(vii) The development must be in conformity with the zonal plan and usage. Any modification to such zonal plan and usage must be taken by strictly following the rules in place and in consideration of the larger public interest and the impact on the environment.
(viii) Whenever any request is made by the respective authority under the planning department/local body for co-operation from another department to take action against any unauthorized construction, the latter shall render immediate assistance and co-operation and any delay or dereliction would be viewed seriously. The States/UT must also take disciplinary action against the erring officials once it is brought to their knowledge.
(ix) In the event of any application / appeal / revision being filed by the owner or builder against the non-issuance of completion certificate or for regularisation of unauthorised construction or rectification of deviation etc., the same shall be disposed of by the authority concerned, including the pending appeals / revisions, as expeditiously as possible, in any event not later than 90 days as statutorily provided.
(x) If the authorities strictly adhere to the earlier directions issued by this court and those being passed today, they would have deterrent effect and the quantum of litigation before the Tribunal / Courts relating to house / building constructions would come down drastically. Hence, necessary instructions should be issued by all the State/UT Governments in the form of Circular to all concerned with a warning that all directions must be scrupulously followed and failure to do so will be viewed seriously, with departmental action being initiated against the erring officials as per law.
(xi) Banks / financial institutions shall sanction loan against any building as a security only after verifying the completion/occupation certificate issued to a building on production of the same by the parties concerned.
(xii) The violation of any of the directions would lead to initiation of contempt proceedings in addition to the prosecution under the respective laws.”
Background
The Court was hearing an appeal challenging the Allahabad High Court's decision to demolish a building purchased by the appellants. The shops and commercial spaces had been illegally constructed by Respondent No. 5 and 6 on land allotted by Respondent No. 1, the U.P. Housing and Development Board, without obtaining the required approvals.
The appellant challenged the demolition order on grounds of long-standing occupancy and alleged lapses by the authorities in not sending prior notices to the appellant.
Respondent No.1 argued that the construction was in blatant violation of residential zoning and lacked statutory approvals. It informed that several notices were issued to the original allottee (Respondent No.5 and 6) and the Appellant, but no corrective action was taken. According to them, delay and inaction do not validate illegal constructions.
Affirming the High Court's decision, the judgment authored by Justice Mahadevan emphasized that illegal constructions cannot be permitted to thrive in blatant violation of mandatory legal provisions. The Court further noted that prolonged occupancy, financial investment, and authority's inaction do not legitimize unauthorized structures.
A detailed report of the judgment can be read here.
The Court directed that the judgment be circulated to all States/UTs.
Appearance:
For Petitioner(s) Mr. Jitendra Mohan Sharma, Sr. Adv. Mr. Ajit Sharma, AOR Mr. Amrit Pradhan, Adv. Mr. Akshat Sharma, Adv. Mr. Durgesh Kumar, Adv. Mr. Sandeep Singh, Adv. Mr. Sanchit Garga, Adv. Mr. Pahlad Singh Sharma, AOR
For Respondent(s) Mr. Vishwajit Singh, Sr. Adv. Mr. Abhishek Kumar Singh, AOR Mr. Pankaj Singh, Adv. Mr. S. Singh,Adv. Ms. Ridhima Singh, Adv. Ms. Anamika Yadav, Adv. Mr. S. R. Singh, Sr. Adv. Mr. Rajeev Kumar Dubey, Adv. Mr. Ashiwan Mishra, Adv. Mr. Kamlendra Mishra, AOR Mr. Pahlad Singh Sharma, AOR
Case Title: RAJENDRA KUMAR BARJATYA AND ANOTHER VERSUS U.P. AVAS EVAM VIKAS PARISHAD & ORS.
Citation : 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 1009