- (1.) THIS appeal is directed against an order dated 8th May, 1987 passed by the leamed trial 3udge in Civil Order No. 11873 w) of 1985. By the aforesaid order, the leamed-trial 3udge allowed the writ petition moved by the respondent No. 1 Adhis Chandra Sinha, Trustee of the Trust. Estate of Adhis Chandra Sinha of 58, Barrackpore Trunk Road, calcutta-7oooo2 and quashed the resolution of the Building Committee lated the 29th April, 1985 since communicated by Memo. No. LI 71 dated 1st May, 1985.
(2.) THE respondent no. 1, writ petitioner, is the sole Trustee, of Adhis chandra Sinha Trust Estate and premises No. 227/1a, Acharya 3agadish chandra Bose Road is the property of the said Trust. The writ petitioner lade an application for sanction of a plan for constructing a multi-stored building (six storied) on the said property after demolishing the existing building and the necessary formalities for' obtain ing such sanction from the Corporation of Calcutta were also complied with. 'no objection' certificate and permission had also been obtained from various other authorities required for obtaining such sanction. It appears that the Building Cell of the Corporation of Calcutta after scrutinising the said Plan and documents held that there was no defect and/or fraud in the said Plan and the documents filed and instructed the Accounts Department to accept 6 sets of Plan along with requisite fees for approval/sanction of the said plan. The writ petitioner thereafter deposited six sets of Plan along with various documents including the prescribed form and fee. The plan and the documents were sent to the Sanitary Engineer and the Structural Supervisor for their observations. The Structural Supervisor informed that there was no objection from the structural point of view and the Sanitary Engineer also approved the said plan from the sanitary point of view. Thereafter, one set of plan was sent to the Calcutta Metropolitan Development Authority and another to the Deputy Commissioner of Police (Traffic) for their respective observations. The Calcutta Metropolitan Authority indicated their no objection but the Deputy Commissioner of Police (Traffic), however, observed that as the proposed building was going to be constructed near the junction of two important roads, namely, Sarat Bose Road and Acharya jagadish Chandra Bose Road, the construction of such building may create a traffic problem and as such permission for multi stored building should not be given. It may be noted in this connection that the Commissioner of Calcutta Municipal Corporation scrutinised the proposal for the multistoried building and was of the opinion that the propose building was going to be constructed at a tandem plot and it was not just on the crossing of the two important roads and there would be hardly any problem for the traffic. Moreover, the proposed building also has -taken care for the Car Parking space not only for the occupants but also of the visitors coming to the proposed building. It may be noted in this connection that there is a Building Sub Committee in which the Deputy Commissioner of Calcutta Police (Traffic) is one of the members and in view of the objections raised by the Deputy Commissioner of Police, the Building committee did not recommend the sanction of the proposed plan although all other authorities expressed their no objection in respect of the proposed plan. It may be noted in this connection that the then Deputy Commissioner of Police (Traffic) raised objections about the sanction of the said plan no only in respect of the site in question but in respect of few other site namely, premises No. 227/1a, 227, 228/a and 229 Acharya Jagadish chandra Bose Road and it was indicated by the Deputy Commissioner that all the four locations happened to be on the southern side of Acharya jagadish Chandra Bose Road and very close to the crossing of the said road with Sarat Bose Road. The learned trial Judge after considering the relevant facts and circumstances of the case has come to the finding that there was no justification for the municipal authorities in refusing to grant sanction of the building plan submitted by the petitioner in respect of the premises in question. The learned Judge was also of the view that under the existing provisions of the. Calcutta Municipal Corporation Act there was no justification to object only on the ground of a high rise building. The learned trial Judge quashed the resolution of the Building Com mittee and restrained the respondents from giving any effect or further effect to the joint inspection report and the resolution of the Municipal building Committee.
(3.) BEING aggrieved by the aforesaid order, the Calcutta Municipal corporation and its -officers have preferred the instant appeal and Mr. Dutt, the learned counsel has submitted that the Municipal Building Committee is constituted under Section 391 of the Calcutta Municipal Corporation Act and such Municipal Building Committee scrutinises the applications for erection or re-erection of a building and forwards its recommendation to the Mayor -in- Council. Mr. Dutt has further submitted, that under Section 396 no sanction can be accorded without prior approval of the Mayor-in-Council in case of any building except a residential building proposed to be erected or re-erected on a plot of 500 square meter or less of Land. The proviso to the said section envisages that the Mayor -in- Council should consider the recommendation of the Municipal Building Committee and finalise its decision after such consideration. It appears to us that the municipal Building Committee had without any justification, entertained the objection against the proposed building which will be evident from the fact that in respect of plot No. 228/a, Acharya Jagadish Chandra bose Road, which is right on the comer of the junction of Acharya Jagadish chandra Bose Road and Sarat Bose Road, the Corporation of Calcutta has already sanctioned a 12 storied building for commercial purpose by sanction Plan No. 128 dated 31st December, 1986. On 2/5, Sarat Bose road, which is only two buildings away from the crossing of the said Acharya Jagadish Chandra Bose Road and Sarat Bose Road another 12 storied residential building has been sanctioned by the Corporation by Sanction plan No. 59 dated 13th August, 1986. In respect of 229, Acharya Jagadish chandra Bose Road, two buildings have been sanctioned under Sanction plan No. 146, one for ten storied and another for six storied and the said fact has been noted by the learned trial Judge in the judgment. Similarly on 227, Acharya Jagadish Chandra Bose Road under Sanction Plan No. 148 a plan for six storied building has been sanctioned. The site in question is a tandem plot and about 200 yards away from the crossing and the commissioner of the Corporation of Calcutta has noted that the proposed building would hardly cause any problem for traffic. In the aforesaid facts and circumstances it appears to us that there was hardly any reason to refuse the sanction of the plan for a residential cum commercial building upto six storey on the site in question and the Building Committee arbitrarily and capriciously rejected the same. In the aforesaid circumstances, it must be deemed that there was no basis for such objection and the recommendation against sanction by the Building Committee should be ignored.;