IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.15309 of 2006 Smt.Malti Sinha, W/o Sri Sitaram Lal, R/o Gowlal Aakhara Road, , P.S. Danapur, District Patna ….. Petitioner Versus 1. The Patna Regional Development Authority through the Chairman, Mauryalok Complex, Patna 2. The Vice Chairman, Patna Regional Development Authority, Mauryalk Complex, Patna 3. President Appellate Tribunal, Patna Regional Development Authority, Mauryalok, Patna 4. Susheela Devi W/o Krishna Prasad, resident of Mohalla Gawlal Aakhara Road, P.S. Danapur, District Patna ……. Respondents ----------- 2 20.07.2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the P.R.D.A./P.M.C. Petitioner has challenged the order dated 18.8.2006 passed by the Appellate Tribunal, P.R.D.A., Patna as contained in Annexure 11 and also the order dated 5.7.2006 passed in Vigilance Case No. 40B/2005 by the Vice Chairman, P.R.D.A., Patna. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the orders have been passed without considering that the construction has apparently been made in violation of the Patna Planning Standard and Building Bylaws read with Bihar Building Authority Act, 1981. Learned counsel for the P.M.C/P.R.D.A. 2 appears and submits that the plan has been sanctioned as per the existing Rules and Bylaws and the authorities have found no deviation in the construction when the same was compared with the sanctioned plan. From the impugned original order also, it appears that there has been no deviation in the construction by the Respondent no. 4 when compared with the sanctioned plan. The same stand has been taken by the appellate authority. Even before this Court also learned counsel for the petitioner could not demonstrate that there has been any deviation from the sanctioned plan or anything to show that the plan has been sanctioned against the existing Bylaws or Rules. In above view of the matter, this Court does not find any merit in this writ application. The same is, accordingly, dismissed. Spd/- ( Dr. Ravi Ranjan, J.)