Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, an occupant of residential premises within the Pune Cantonment Board limits, obtained sanction for building plans on 6 May 2008 under Section 238 of the Cantonments Act, 2006. During construction, on 23 December 2008, the Board's technical staff noticed that the petitioner was demolishing and reconstructing servant quarters without prior approval. The petitioner claimed only minor repairs were being done. On 21 May 2009, the Chief Executive Officer issued a notice under Section 248(1) of the Act directing demolition and stoppage of further construction. The petitioner appealed under Section 340 before the General Officer Commanding-in-Chief, Pune, who dismissed the appeal, finding that the petitioner had demolished and reconstructed the servant quarters without sanction. Consequently, the Board issued a notice on 12 February 2014 to comply with the initial notice. The petitioner challenged these actions by way of a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution. The High Court, after hearing the parties, held that the reconstruction without prior sanction was unauthorized and the Board was justified in issuing the demolition notice. The petition was dismissed.
Headnote
A) Cantonment Law - Unauthorized Construction - Section 248(1) of Cantonments Act, 2006 - Demolition Notice - Petitioner carried out demolition and reconstruction of servant quarters without prior sanction from the Board - Board issued notice under Section 248(1) to demolish and stop further construction - Appellate Authority confirmed the notice - Held that the reconstruction without sanction amounts to unauthorized construction and the Board was justified in issuing the demolition notice (Paras 1-3).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the notice issued under Section 248(1) of the Cantonments Act, 2006 for demolition of reconstructed servant quarters without prior sanction is valid
Final Decision
The High Court dismissed the writ petition, upholding the notice dated 21 May 2009, the appellate order dated 30 November 2013, and the consequent notice dated 12 February 2014.
Law Points
- Section 248(1) of Cantonments Act
- 2006 empowers Board to order demolition of unauthorized construction
- Section 340 provides appeal remedy
- Section 238 requires prior sanction for building plans
- reconstruction without sanction is unauthorized
Case Details
2014 LawText (BOM) (07) 70
Civil Writ Petition No. 1959 of 2014
A.S. Oka, A.S. Chandurkar
Dr Virendra V. Tulzapurkar, Senior Advocate with Mr Nikhil Sakhardande & Ms Ayushi Agarwal for Petitioner; Shri K.J. Presswala with Shri Sandeep Goyal for Respondent Nos. 1 and 2
Pune Cantonment Board, Chief Executive Officer, Pune Cantonment Board, Appellate Authority HQ Southern Command Pune
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Writ petition under Article 226 challenging notice under Section 248(1) of Cantonments Act, 2006 and appellate order
Remedy Sought
Petitioner sought quashing of notice dated 21 May 2009, appellate order dated 30 November 2013, and consequent notice dated 12 February 2014
Filing Reason
Petitioner aggrieved by Board's order to demolish reconstructed servant quarters without prior sanction
Previous Decisions
Appellate Authority dismissed petitioner's appeal under Section 340 on 30 November 2013
Issues
Whether the reconstruction of servant quarters without prior sanction amounts to unauthorized construction under the Cantonments Act, 2006
Whether the notice under Section 248(1) and the appellate order are valid
Submissions/Arguments
Petitioner argued that only minor repairs were undertaken, not reconstruction
Board contended that demolition and reconstruction without sanction is unauthorized
Ratio Decidendi
Reconstruction of servant quarters without prior sanction from the Cantonment Board under Section 238 of the Cantonments Act, 2006 constitutes unauthorized construction, and the Board is empowered under Section 248(1) to order its demolition.
Judgment Excerpts
By this Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India the petitioner challenges notice dated 21st May, 2009 issued by respondent No.1 Pune Cantonment Board issued under Section 248 (1) of the Cantonments Act, 2006
The Appellate Authority after considering the material on record and after hearing the parties held that the petitioner had demolished and reconstructed the old servant quarters without sanction from the Board.
Procedural History
Petitioner applied for sanction on 2 August 2007; sanction granted on 6 May 2008; inspection on 23 December 2008 revealed unauthorized work; notice under Section 248(1) issued on 21 May 2009; appeal under Section 340 dismissed on 30 November 2013; consequent notice on 12 February 2014; writ petition filed and heard finally.
Acts & Sections
- Cantonments Act, 2006: Section 238, Section 248(1), Section 340
- Constitution of India: Article 226
