- (1.) HEARD the learned counsel for the parties.
(2.) THE present writ petition has been filed making grievance that in municipal area of Ranchi, which is a capital city, several illegal constructions have been raised by large number of public resulting in a chaotic situation, affecting the public at large and created serious traffic congestion problem, parking problem and what not, which we need to narrate in detail. The petition was filed on 26th April, 2010 and on 26th July, 2010, it was ordered that the "Respondents shall file an affidavit regarding the plan, according to which they were proceeding in the past for removal of encroachments. If there was no plan, but encroachment was being removed on places chosen at random, arbitrarily, then the officers may have a lot to answer for, considering the evils which could result to the advantage of the officers from such random selection of places for removing encroachment . The Court then observed that why short time is being given to the Respondents, because of the reason that no plan has been disclosed so far and the learned counsel appearing for the State of Jharkhand says that he is not aware of any plan of action according to which anti encroachment team has proceeded so far. On 13th September, 2011, the Court observed that no steps have been taken to remove the encroachments existing on the main road, whereby general public is facing day to day problem. The Vice -Chairman of the R.R.D.A. and the Chief Executive Officer of the Municipal Corporation were directed to remain present in Court on 19th September, 2011 with a concrete action plan and apprise the Court about the existing Town Planning and Master Plan, if in existence within the R.R.D.A. Then on 19th September, 2011, another order was passed after taking note of the contention of the counsels for the Ranchi Regional Development Authority and the Ranchi Municipal Corporation. It was stated on 19th September, 2011 that the cases of Ranchi Regional Development Authority have been sent to Ranchi Municipal Corporation for taking further action. There appears to be some confusion that who shall exercise the power of removal of encroachments, therefore, this Court gave longer time to the party respondents and this Court made it clear that there may be lack of coordination and cooperation between the two bodies i.e. Ranchi Regional Development Authority and the Ranchi Municipal Corporation and there may be some issues which are not addressed with respect to the distribution of work and powers. Those issues may also be addressed within this long period so that the public may not suffer because of the dispute between the two bodies in the city of Ranchi itself. Today, learned counsel appearing for the Ranchi Municipal Corporation drew our attention to the affidavit, dated 14th November, 2011 and submitted that it is true that some powers have been given to the Municipal Corporation, Ranchi but power under Section 54 of the Ranchi Development Authority Act has not been given, whereunder, only the illegal constructions can be demolished by the Municipal Corporation, Ranchi. We found from the record that only order has been passed to authorize the Municipal Corporation, Ranchi to grant sanction for the building construction. During course of hearing, we came to know about the Section, i.e., Section 242 of the Patna Municipal Corporation Act, 1951. The Act which has been adopted by the State of Jharkhand, obviously after creation of the State of Jharkhand in the year 2000. Section 242 of the Patna Municipal Corporation Act, 1951, as adopted by the State of Jharkhand is as under: - "242: Penalty for illegal erection or re -erection of building: - (1) If any person begins, continues or completes the erection or re -erection of, or any material alternation in, a building, or the construction or enlargement of a well, without giving the notice referred to in section 230 or waiting for a period of one month after giving such notice, or in contravention of an order passed by the Chief Executive Officer refusing sanction or any written directions of the Chief Executive Officer under section 233, he shall be liable to a fine not exceeding five hundred rupees. (2) In any case where the Chief Executive Officer considers that erection, re -erection or alteration of a building, or part of a building or construction or enlargement of a well, on any land is an offence under sub -section (1) he may, within one month from the date on which information is received by him of such offence, by written notice direct the owner or occupier of the land to stop such erection, re -erection, alteration, construction or enlargement, and may in like manner and within the same period direct the alteration or demolition, as he may deem necessary, of such building or part of a building or well: Provided that no action shall be taken under this sub -section more than one month after such erection, re -erection, alteration, construction or enlargement has been completed. (3) If a person to whom a notice has been given under the foregoing provisions of this section fails to comply with the notice before the expiry of twenty eight days, or such longer period as the District Judge may, on his application, allow, the Chief Executive Officer may pull down or remove the work in question, or effect such alternation therein as he deems necessary, and may recover from him the expenses reasonably incurred by the Chief Executive Officer in so doing. (4) If the plans are approved by the Chief Executive Officer and the approval is communicated to the person intending to build the house or if the plans are rejected by the Chief Executive Officer, but no notice of their rejection is given to person intending to build the house within the prescribed period, it shall not be open to he Chief Executive Officer to give a notice under sub -section (1) and (2) on the ground that the building is erected or re -erected in contravention of any scheme or bye -laws or any other requirements under this chapter. (5) Nothing in this section shall affect the right of the Corporation or any other person to apply to the District Judge for an injunction for the removal or alteration of any building on the ground that it contravenes any provision of this Act or of the bye -laws made thereunder, but if the building is one in respect of Act or of the bye -laws made thereunder, but if the building is one in respect of which plans have been deposited and the plans have been passed by the Chief executive Officer, or notice that they have been rejected has not been given within the prescribed period after the deposit thereof, and if the work has been executed in accordance with the plans, the Court in granting an injunction shall have power to order the Corporation to pay to the owner of the work such compensation as the Court thinks just, but before making any such order the Court shall cause the Chief Executive Officer, if not a party, to be joined as a party to the proceeding .
(3.) BEFORE commenting on Section 242, we would like to mention here that Chapter XIV in the said Act deals with the subject of building control and Chapter XVI deals with the subject of streets and public streets and conversion of streets into public streets. Chapter XVII deals with the general provisions as to streets and public nuisance. There are very many other chapters for different subjects but we are concerned with the issue of taking care of illegal constructions in view of the subject matter in the writ petition.;