ADMINISTRATOR NAGAR PALIKA Vs. BHARAT
LAWS(SC)-1996-10-33
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA (FROM: MADHYA PRADESH)
Decided on October 29,1996

ADMINISTRATOR,NAGAR PALIKA Appellant
VERSUS
BHARAT Respondents

JUDGEMENT

- (1.) Leave granted.
(2.) Heard the counsel for the parties. In Neemuch town in Madhya pradesh there are a number of bungalows with large compounds. We are concerned with one such bungalow, bearing No. 58, said to be located in Plot no. 27-B. By an order dated 30-3-1969 the Municipal Council, Neemuch sanctioned under Section 182 of the Madhya Pradesh Municipalities Act, the layout submitted by one Ms Contractor. The permission was granted subject to the condition that "The applicant will have to make her own arrangement for pucca roads, the necessary drains for outlet of water, lighting poles as per the requirements of the Madhya Pradesh Electricity Board, and, the necessary arrangement of pipelines for drinking water as per the scheme". It was further stipulated that "Only after the entire arrangement is made the applicant shall have the right to sell plots according to the scheme or to obtain permission for construction thereon and then only the buyers shall have any rights. Before construction or sale, the applicant shall have to obtain certificate regarding the entire said work being completed from the Municipal council". After the said permission was granted, the plots in the said bungalow area were sold. There is no material before us to indicate how many plots were made and when they were sold.
(3.) The case of the Municipal Council is that the conditions of the said permission were violated and, therefore, all the constructions made in the said area are illegal. It is, however, not brought to our notice that any action was taken under the Madhya Pradesh Municipalities Act for violation of the said conditions. Be that as it may, in the year 1982, the Madhya Pradesh legislature enacted "the Madhya Pradesh Vinirdishta Bhrashta Acharan nivaran Adhiniyam, 1982". This Act was made to provide for punishment of specific corrupt practices resorted to by the officials and other persons in connection with the affairs, of the State and local authorities. Chapter VIII sets out the provisions relating to illegal colonization. Illegal colonization is made a punishable offence. Any officer who facilitates or allows any such illegal colonization is also punishable. The land involved in illegal colonization is liable to be forfeited. We are, however, concerned in this matter with the proviso to Section 30 occurring in Chapter VIII. Section 30 reads as follows: "30.Punishment for abetment of the offence of illegal construction. Whoever, in the area of illegal diversion or illegal colonization (i) being an officer, having power to sanction layout or sanction a map for the construction of a building, grants, sanction or approves such layout or the map; or (ii) being an officer under a primary duty to do so knowingly omits to report illegal diversion of land or illegal construction of a building in such an area to the proper authority; or (iii) being an officer or the authority competent to sanction electrical or water supply connection grants such sanction with respect to the building in such area; or (ii) illegally influences the officers aforesaid in granting such sanction or in omitting to make a report of such diversion of land or construction of a building in such area, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description which may extend to one year or with fine or both: provided that nothing contained in clause (iii) shall apply to the cases covered thereby where the Collector of the district concerned certifies that in the public interest there is no objection to provide electrical and water supply connections to the buildings in the area of illegal diversion or illegal colonization in existence immediately prior to 30-10-1982. ";


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.