IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.7284 of 2000 SRI R.N.CHAUBEY @ RABINDRA NATH CHAUBEY Versus THE P.R.D.A. THRU.ITS V.C. ----------- 10. 5.2.2009 Heard Mr. Naresh Kumar Malhotra, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. P.K.Mishra, learned counsel appearing on behalf of Patna Municipal Corporation. In view of the fact that Mr. Malhotra accepts the liability on the part of the petitioner to comply the deficiency in the plan as pointed out by then P.R.D.A. and also undertakes to remove them as pointed out in the counter affidavit, nothing remains for adjudication in this case. Mr. Malhotra, however, has submitted that the communication of the P.R.D.A. dated 6.9.2001, as contained in Annexure ‘A’, pointing out the discrepancy in the plan can be removed by the petitioner only in terms of the By-laws. This Court for the present is not going to decide as to what is the requirement of the By-laws and whether the P.R.D.A. had gone beyond the by-laws in raising such an objection. For the present this Court will only record that the 2 petitioner had submitted a plan for post facto approval and when certain objections by way of Annexure ‘A’ were raised by P.R.D.A., the petitioner was not prepared to remove those objections. In that view of the matter, if the petitioner removes the anomalies pointed out by the P.R.D.A. as per the building By-laws of the P.R.D.A., the Patna Municipal Corporation now successor body of P.R.D.A. would be under obligation to consider the plan and pass an appropriate order for its sanction so that the whole episode of post facto sanction comes to an end at an early date preferably within a period of one month from the date of removal of such anomalies by the petitioner. The petitioner also may not take the things leisurely and must do so within a period of one month. So that the whole episode must come to an end within a period of three months from the date of receipt/ production of a copy of this order. It goes without saying that if the petitioner does not comply the undertaking given by him to this Court and does not get post facto sanction of plan, the authorities 3 of Patna Municipal Corporation will be at liberty to take coercive steps against the petitioner as was envisaged in the impugned order. With the aforementioned observation, this application is disposed of. (Mihir Kumar Jha,J.) Surendra/