IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.14148 of 2010 1. NAGENDRA PRASAD SINGH S/O CHANDRADEO SINGH R/O MOHALLA- KADAMKUAN, NEW AREA, P.S. KADAMKUAN, DISTT.- PATNA Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR THROUGH SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF URBAN DEVELOPMENT, GOVERNMENT OF BIHAR, PATNA 2. THE PATNA MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, PATNA THROUGH THE MUNICIPAL COMMISSIONER, PATNA 3. THE MUNICIPAL COMMISSIONER, PATNA MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, PATNA ----------- 06. 17.01.2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, for the State of Bihar, for the Patna Municipal Corporation and for the Intervenor. Several questions have raised by the counsel for the parties. The writ petition is being disposed off on one question only and the other questions are left open as their relevance may or may not arise depending on the decision of the first question. The building in question was sanctioned on 20.11.1999 as B+G+7. The owner desires to construct an additional eight floor. On the present foundation strength of the building as it may exist, rests its capacity to tolerate the height and structure weight. Applying science it is difficult to judicially appreciate the attitude of the parties for foundation strength assessment today by digging the foundation earth of the existing building with all its attendant consequences. 2 The foundation strength of a building and its capacity to bear further structure load is a highly complex and technical matter which has to be left to the experts to decide. The manner in which the petitioner and the Corporation have both proceeded, this Court finds no reason to interfere. In todays world with the availability of structural testing instruments for scientific analysis including moisture testing, ultrasonic testing, corrosion testing, impulse response for low strength integrity and foundation length determination, sonic echo etc. it is for the petitioner to decide, if he wishes to utilize modern technology and methods for foundation assessment to be carried out by it in presence of the Municipal Corporation officials and approach the authority afresh. There is no occasion for the Court to interfere with the impugned order dated 11.8.2010. Interim order stands vacated. The writ application is disposed. P.K ( Navin Sinha, J.)