Case Note & Summary
The Petitioner, Fortune Developers and Infrastructure, owned a portion of property surveyed under No.154 at Yerawada, Pune, and had already constructed four buildings (E1, E2, E3, or four wings) consisting of parking plus eleven storeys. On 26 November 2018, the Pune Municipal Corporation (PMC) issued a Commencement Certificate for constructing a ground-plus five-storeyed building adjacent to these four buildings, and a revised Commencement Certificate was issued on 21 September 2021. Based on these certificates, the Petitioner commenced construction. While construction was midway, the Superintendent of Yerawada Central Prison (YCP) addressed a letter dated 31 December 2021 to the PMC requesting to stop further construction on the ground that there was a proposal for constructing a modernised prison with capacity for 3000 inmates adjacent to the existing YCP, and the Petitioner's project would be within 150 meters from such proposed prison. Relying on this letter, the PMC issued a Stop Work Notice dated 28 March 2022, stopping the construction. The Petitioner challenged both communications. The Petitioner argued that the project was at a distance of around 620 meters from the perimeter wall of YCP, and that the Special Inspector General of Police (Prisons) had earlier stated in a communication dated 17 February 2011 that the project was beyond 182.88 meters and no NOC from the Prison Department was required. The Petitioner contended that the rules under Section 59 of the Prisons Act only regulate internal construction within 150 meters from the perimeter walls of a Central Prison and do not apply to construction beyond the perimeter walls. The Petitioner also argued that the impugned communications violated Article 300A of the Constitution. The Respondents, including the PMC and the Superintendent of YCP, filed affidavits suggesting that there was an Open District Prison outside the perimeter walls of YCP and the project would fall within 150 meters from its boundaries. The court examined the provisions of the Prisons Act and the rules framed thereunder, and held that the rules only apply to internal configuration and construction within 150 meters from the perimeter walls of a Central Prison, and do not regulate construction beyond the perimeter walls. The court further held that property rights are valuable constitutional rights under Article 300A and cannot be interfered with based on future proposals without legal backing. The court found that the impugned communications were arbitrary and without legal authority. Accordingly, the court quashed the Stop Work Notice dated 28 March 2022 and the Superintendent's letter dated 31 December 2021, and directed the PMC to permit the Petitioner to continue construction in accordance with the Commencement Certificates.
Headnote
A) Prisons Act - Construction Rules - Section 59 - Rules under Prisons Act - The rules framed under Section 59 of the Prisons Act, 1894, only regulate internal configuration and construction within 150 meters from the perimeter walls of a Central Prison, and do not apply to construction beyond the perimeter walls. The court held that the impugned communications stopping construction based on a proposed prison project were without legal authority. (Paras 11-12) B) Constitutional Law - Property Rights - Article 300A - Property rights are valuable constitutional rights and cannot be interfered with based on future proposals without the backing of any legal provisions, rules, or regulations. The court held that the impugned communications violated Article 300A of the Constitution. (Para 14) C) Administrative Law - Arbitrariness - Stop Work Notice - A stop work notice issued solely on the basis of a letter from the prison superintendent, without any applicable rule or regulation, and after construction had commenced based on valid commencement certificates, is arbitrary and unsustainable. The court held that the PMC could not stop construction based on a proposed prison facility. (Paras 13-14)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the Stop Work Notice dated 28 March 2022 and the Superintendent's letter dated 31 December 2021, stopping construction of the Petitioner's project on the ground that it falls within 150 meters of a proposed prison, are legally valid and sustainable.
Final Decision
The court quashed the Stop Work Notice dated 28 March 2022 and the letter dated 31 December 2021, and directed the PMC to permit the Petitioner to continue construction in accordance with the Commencement Certificates.
Law Points
- Construction beyond 150 meters from prison perimeter wall not prohibited
- Rules under Prisons Act do not regulate construction beyond perimeter walls
- Property rights under Article 300A cannot be interfered without legal backing
- Stop work notice based on future proposal without legal basis is arbitrary
