1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR WRIT PETITION NO. 1443 OF 2010 (Pradeep G. Lakhani & Anr. vs. State of Maharashtra & Anr.) Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's orders or directions and Registrar's orders. CORAM : B.P. DHARMADHIKARI, J. APRIL 21, 2010. Heard Shri Manohar, learned counsel for the petitioners, Shri Adgokar, learned AGP for respondent No.1 and Shri Kulsange, learned counsel for respondent No.2. Shri Kariya, learned counsel is appearing for the – applicant – proposed intervenor in Civil Application No. 1209 of 2010. The records show that the petitioners were given necessary permission and sanction for construction vide communication dated 14.08.2009. The extent of permissible construction is disclosed to be 16539 sq. feet in that communication. Thereafter vide notice dated 26.02.2010, the said permission/ sanction has been cancelled and he has been directed to stop/ discontinue the construction. The reasons given in this order show that construction is coming up on consolidated plots and is in excess of FSI-1. It is also stated that it is contrary to Section 52 of Bombay Villge Panchayat Act, 1958 and Rule 7 of 1967 Rules framed thereunder for regulation of buildings and extension of Gaothon. 2 Shri Manohar, learned counsel states that the petitioners were not given any previous opportunity to show cause or were not heard at any point of time. He fairly states that the petitioners have already suspended construction activities and if within stipulated time the Gram Panchayat is directed to hear them and decide the issue, it will be in the interest of all concerned. He points out that the petitioners have not been served with any documents or any letters on the basis of which the impugned notice dated 26.02.2010 has been issued. Shri Kulsange, learned counsel states that in accordance with law, because of complaints made by proposed intervenor, the resolution has been passed and thereafter notice has been issued. The learned counsel for the intervenor states that intervenor has already approached Standing Committee of the Zilla Parishad in the matter. It is not necessary for this Court to look into all these aspects. The facts clearly show that after notices the area of plot is 10051 square feet, the sanction has been accorded to raise construction up to 16539 square feet. In the impugned communication, FSI-1 is disclosed with reference to letters received from some superior. Why the construction is in violation of Section 52 of the Act or Rule 7 of the Rules is not clarified. In this situation, it will be appropriate to direct Respondent No. 2 – Gram Panchayat to hear the petitioner and to take appropriate decision in the matter 3 in accordance with law. Respondent No. 2 shall serve fresh notice along with relevant documents or then shall supply to the petitioners, the relevant material / documents on which it intends to rely to support its finding about the breach of FSI or breach of the legal provisions. The said documents / material be supplied to the petitioners by 30th April 2010. The petitioners can thereafter file their reply, if any, in response to that communication with Gram Panchayat by 4th May 2010 and Gram Panchayat shall proceed to hear the petitioner and decide the issue in accordance with law by 15th May 2010. The petitioner shall not proceed further with the construction till 15th May 2010. Writ petition is accordingly disposed of. No order as to costs. JUDGE *GS.