IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.1348 of 2010 1. SHAUKATH ALI @ SHAKUATH MIAN S/O MD. YUSUF R/O MOHALLA- MURADPUR LANE, DARZI TOLA, P.S.- PIRBAHORE, DISTT.- PATNA Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY URBAN DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, GOVT. OF BIHAR, PATNA 3. THE MUNICIPAL COMMISSIONER PATNA MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, PATNA 4. THE ADDITIONAL MUNICIPAL COMMISSIONER PATNA MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, PATNA 5. THE VIGILANCE OFFICER - CUM - DEPUTY COMMISSIONER PATNA MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, PATNA with CWJC No.1349 of 2010 1. MD. NASIR MIAN S/O MD. ALAM R/O MOHALLA MURADPUR LANE, DARZI TOLA, P.S.- PIRBAHORE, DISTT.- PATNA Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY URBAN DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, GOVT. OF BIHAR, PATNA 3. THE MUNICIPAL COMMISSIONER PATNA MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, PATNA 4. THE ADDITIONAL MUNICIPAL COMMISSIONER PATNA MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, PATNA 5. THE VIGILANCE OFFICER - CUM - DEPUTY COMMISSIONER PATNA MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, PATNA ----------- 2 20.4.2010 How Government works in various departments at cross process to the detriment of the citizen is illustrated here. Petitioners had constructed buildings without prior sanction. They then applied for obtaining the planning report, which is now similar to sanction of the plan. Admittedly, the application, as filed on 10.8.2009, processed and certificate was issued on 30.10.2009. The matter was taken up by the Town Commissioner in a related proceeding for unauthorized construction wherein on 2 14.9.2009 he directed the petitioners to obtain planning report otherwise action may be taken against them. As noticed above, on 30.10.2009 the planning report was duly issued by the Patna Municipal Corporation but on 7.11.2009, Town Commissioner of Patna Municipal Corporation even though notices are the same only on the ground that the plan has not yet been approved, ordered for demolition of the entire structure .What can be more arbitrary , the plan has to be approved by the Patna Municipal Corporation, which is pending before it. The planning report has been cleared and the Town Commissioner of Patna Municipal Corporation now says that plan not having been approved, the buildings must be demolished . In my view, the Town Commissioner should have asked the Planning Department to expedite the approval of the plan and then should have taken action because that is beyond the control of the petitioners. It is within Patna Municipal Corporation itself. For failure on part of Patna Municipal Corporation to process the plan at an early date, the building cannot be ordered to be demolished where ex facto sanction is available . In that view of the matter, I have no option but to quash the order of Town Commissioner, Patna Municipal Corporation, Patna and consequential notice, as contained in Annexure 5 to the writ petition and direct the Town Commissioner to divert his attention more to see that the plans are duly processed and approved at an early date in accordance with law. With the aforesaid observations and directions, the writ 3 petitions stand disposed of. Singh (Navaniti Prasad Singh, J.)