JAMMU, Aug 18: Justice Wasim Sadiq Nargal while hearing a petition filed by Uma Arora and another, who have sought quashing of a 2015 building permission order granting only partial commercial use of their building and mandamus directing authorities to approve their plan for full commercial use has directed J&K Government authorities to file a detailed response explaining the criteria adopted for granting 100% commercial permissions in Channi Himmat locality of Jammu.
The petitioners contended that their building is located in an area which has become 100% commercial and therefore, denial of full commercial use is arbitrary. They placed photographs of adjoining buildings allegedly granted full commercial permission, arguing that the action of the authorities amounted to discrimination by adopting a pick and choose method.
AAG opposed the petition and submitted that the building permission order was in accordance with the J&K Municipal Corporation Act, the J&K Control of Building Operation Act, 1988, applicable regulations, bye-laws and the sanctioned Master Plan.
It was argued that the Tribunal had only compounded excess construction but did not authorize full commercial use of the premises. Permitting such use, the respondents argued, would violate planning laws and the Master Plan provisions applicable to Channi Himmat.
After hearing both the sides, the High Court observed that the petitioners have filed rejoinder affidavit, in which they have denied the stand taken by the respondents by pleading that the entire area has become 100% commercial and, therefore, grant of 100% commercial permission to the petitioners would be legally tenable and accordingly the prayer of the petitioners can be acceded to.
The petitioners, by way of rejoinder affidavit, have also placed on record the relevant photographs evidencing the factum that such 100% commercial permissions have been granted to many business houses/buildings which are adjoining to the building of the petitioners and once such 100% commercial permissions have been granted to the buildings, photographs of which have been placed on record, then the action of the respondents in not granting 100% commercial permission to the petitioners is discriminatory act and the same is not tenable in the eyes of law”, the High Court said.
The petitioners with a view to fortify their claim seek some time to file a supplementary affidavit highlighting the details of all such buildings/business houses in the adjoining area of Channi Himmat, Jammu which have been granted 100% commercial permission and photographs of which have been placed on record along with the rejoinder affidavit.
Court while allowing the prayer of the petitioners to file a supplementary affidavit said that needful be done by the petitioners within a period of three weeks.
Subject to filing of supplementary affidavit by the petitioners, the respondents are also directed to file reply to the supplementary affidavit thereafter within a period of two weeks, thereby giving the detail of each and every building/business house to which 100% commercial permission has been granted by the respondents.
The respondents have further been asked to clarify as to what yardsticks have been adopted by them while granting 100% commercial permission to all such buildings/business houses in the adjoining area of Channi Himmat, Jammu in the vicinity of the petitioners’ building and what prevented the respondents not to give similar treatment to the petitioners & also directed to keep the record of the business houses/buildings, details of which are likely to be given by the petitioners in the supplementary affidavit, available on the next date of hearing for perusal of this court.
|