IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.6941 of 2002 M/S CLASSICON BUILDER(I)PVT.LTD Versus P.R.D.A.& ORS ----------- 5. 20.4.2009 Heard Mr. Basant Kumar Chaudhary, learned Senior counsel for the petitioner and the counsel for the respondents. While this Court would find no reason to interfere with the two impugned orders passed by the P.R.D.A. and the appellate authority, this Court in the peculiar facts and circumstances of this case, would like to direct the respondents including successors of P.R.D.A. including Town Municipal Commissioner Patna Municipal Corporation to reconsider the whole thing from a limited angle as to whether the demolition is absolute necessary for safeguarding the rights of easement of the persons residing in the neighborhood of the building of the petitioner. That is so because the demolition of the part of the building of the petitioner is basically sought to be made in the right set back (South). If thus the authorities would find that on account of not leaving right set back, it is only the flat owners of the petitioner who alone are 2 going to be affected, in that event though it would be against the provisions of Building Bye-laws but then taking into account that it is only the flat owners of the petitioners who are going to suffer would recall the order of demolition. If however on account of existence of this building, others being in the neighborhood, on account of their being in right side set back (South) of the building of the petitioners are going to suffer, the petitioner will have no option but to demolish the portion of the building which has not been found to be condonable as per Building Bye-laws as held in the impugned orders. As a matter of fact this Court would also notice that the uncontroverted statements of the respondents in paragraphs 16, 17 and 18 of the counter affidavit reveal that the nature of violation alleged against the petitioner was either in respect of shortage in parking area or in the right set back or in the total built up area. Thus, whatever is condonable as per the Building Bye-laws that may be allowed to be availed by the petitioner on payment of 3 amount and so far demolition is concerned, this Court has already indicated that demolition of the building should be the last resort only if it is affecting others, who are not the flat owners/occupiers of the building of the petitioner. The successor body of P.R.D.A. must decide the matter one way or the other within a period of six months from the date of receipt or production of a copy of this order, after giving opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and any other affected person, by passing a reasoned order. The stay of demolition of the portion of the building of the petitioner as directed in the order of this Court dated 1.10.2002 shall continue till such a final decision is taken by Town Municipal Commissioner of Patna Municipal Corporation. With the aforesaid observations/directions this writ application is finally disposed of. (Mihir Kumar Jha,J.) Surendra/