Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Savitribai Phule Shikshan Prasarak Mandal, challenged a notice dated 9th March 2018 issued by the Solapur Municipal Corporation demanding payment of development charges of Rs. 8 crores with interest, totaling approximately Rs. 9.50 crores, and threatening demolition of unauthorised construction. The construction was carried out without obtaining permission under Section 44 of the Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act, 1966 (MRTP Act). The Municipal Corporation had earlier issued a notice under Section 53 of the MRTP Act on 17th February 2017, and the petitioner's application for retention under Section 53(3) was refused. The petitioner presumed that payment of the demanded charges would regularise the illegal construction. The Court, in its oral judgment, rejected this presumption, holding that there is no right to regularise unauthorised construction merely by paying development charges. The petition was dismissed, upholding the Municipal Corporation's action.
Headnote
A) Municipal Law - Unauthorised Construction - Regularisation - Section 44, 53 Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act, 1966 - The petitioner constructed without obtaining prior permission under Section 44 MRTP Act. The Municipal Corporation issued a notice under Section 53 for demolition. The petitioner argued that payment of development charges would regularise the construction. The Court held that there is no right to regularise illegal construction by payment of fees; the notice was valid and the petition was dismissed. (Paras 1-5)
Issue of Consideration
Whether a notice demanding payment of development charges and threatening demolition of unauthorised construction can be challenged on the ground that the construction is capable of being regularised upon payment of such charges.
Final Decision
The Writ Petition is dismissed. The notice dated 9th March 2018 is upheld. No order as to costs.
Law Points
- Unauthorised construction cannot be regularised merely by payment of development charges
- Section 44 MRTP Act requires prior permission
- Section 53 MRTP Act provides for removal of unauthorised construction
- No vested right to regularisation
Case Details
2019 LawText (BOM) (08) 55
Writ Petition No. 3351 of 2018 with Civil Application No. 2030 of 2019
S. C. Dharmadhikari, G. S. Patel
Mr Sukand R Kulkarni for Petitioner, Mr Deendayal G Dhanure for Respondent No. 1
Savitribai Phule Shikshan Prasarak Mandal, through its President, Prof. MN Navale
Solapur Municipal Corporation through its Commissioner and City Engineer
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Writ Petition under Article 226 challenging a notice demanding payment of development charges and threatening demolition of unauthorised construction.
Remedy Sought
Petitioner sought to quash the notice dated 9th March 2018 and prevent demolition of the construction.
Filing Reason
Petitioner claimed that the construction was capable of being regularised upon payment of development charges.
Previous Decisions
A notice under Section 53 of MRTP Act was issued on 17th February 2017; petitioner's application for retention under Section 53(3) was refused.
Issues
Whether the petitioner has a right to regularise unauthorised construction by paying development charges.
Whether the notice demanding payment and threatening demolition is valid.
Submissions/Arguments
Petitioner argued that the construction can be regularised by paying development charges of Rs. 8 crores with interest.
Respondent Municipal Corporation contended that the construction was illegal from inception and no permission was obtained under Section 44 MRTP Act.
Ratio Decidendi
There is no right to regularise unauthorised construction merely by payment of development charges. The requirement of prior permission under Section 44 MRTP Act is mandatory, and failure to obtain it renders the construction illegal and liable to demolition under Section 53.
Judgment Excerpts
The Petitioner presumes that because there is a non-payment of development charges of Rs. 8 crores with interest, amounting in all to about Rs. 9.50 crores approximately, that the Municipal Corporation intends to bring down or demolish this construction.
If the payment is made then there is no possibility of such demolition, and that everything illegal and without permission will be condoned, accepted or ‘regularised’.
Procedural History
The Municipal Corporation issued a notice under Section 53 MRTP Act on 17th February 2017. The petitioner applied for retention under Section 53(3), which was refused. Subsequently, a notice dated 9th March 2018 demanded development charges and threatened demolition. The petitioner filed Writ Petition No. 3351 of 2018 challenging this notice.
Acts & Sections
- Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act, 1966: 44, 53, 53(3)
- Constitution of India: 226
