Where a premises has an existing sanctioned building plan

 

Where a premises has an existing sanctioned building plan and certain subsequent additions, alterations or deviations are detected, the mere fact that such deviation is unauthorised vis-à-vis the original sanctioned plan does not, by itself, render demolition inevitable. Where the alleged deviation is capable of being sanctioned/retained under the applicable provisions of the West Bengal Municipal Act, 1993 and the West Bengal Municipal Building Rules, 2007, the competent Municipal authority is required to consider the owner's revised/modified building plan and take a reasoned decision as to whether the deviation can be regularised or retained in accordance with law, subject to fulfilment of the statutory conditions and payment of prescribed fees, charges, fines and other statutory dues.

Ashok Roy Chowdhury & Ors. v. State of West Bengal & Ors.

 

Ashok Roy Chowdhury & Ors. v. State of West Bengal & Ors.

Calcutta High Court, 23 September 2025

This is important as a recent statement of the legal principle.

Although the Municipality involved was Panihati Municipality, rather than Rajpur-Sonarpur Municipality, the statutory framework involved the West Bengal Municipal Act, 1993 and West Bengal Municipal Building Rules, 2007.

The facts are particularly close to your proposition.

An original G+3 sanctioned plan existed. Subsequently, the owner/developer submitted a revised building plan seeking:

1. sanction for further construction; and
2. regularisation of deviations from the ground floor to the third floor.

The Municipal authority sanctioned the permissible portions and regularised certain deviations subject to payment of necessary charges and fines, while directing demolition of the portion which was beyond the permissible scope of approval.

The High Court specifically recorded:

“The power to sanction revised building plan and regularize certain portions lies, with the Municipality…”

and further held that the authorities were within their power where the revised plan had been duly submitted, scrutinised and sanctioned according to law.

Biswajit Basu v. Rajpur Sonarpur Municipality & Ors.

 

Biswajit Basu v. Rajpur Sonarpur Municipality & Ors.

Calcutta High Court, 2 April 2012

This case is also directly concerned with Rajpur-Sonarpur Municipality and alleged unauthorised construction.

The Court directed the Municipal authority to:

• inspect the property;
• verify the sanctioned plan;
• consider whether the statutory side space had been maintained;
• examine the matter under the West Bengal Municipal Act, 1993 and West Bengal Municipal (Building) Rules, 2007; and
• pass a reasoned order.

Importantly, the Court recognised that the legality of the construction had to be determined by applying the statutory Building Rules rather than merely proceeding on the allegation of unauthorised construction.

Satyabrata Pal v. State of West Bengal & Ors.

 

Satyabrata Pal v. State of West Bengal & Ors.

Calcutta High Court, 12 November 2013

This is also particularly useful because it directly concerns Rajpur-Sonarpur Municipality and the West Bengal Municipal Building Rules, 2007.

The Municipality had refused to sanction a building plan. Justice Soumen Sen directed the Municipality to communicate the alleged violations/deficiencies in detail so that the petitioner could take appropriate steps, including filing a modified building plan for consideration in accordance with the West Bengal Municipal Building Rules, 2007.

The Court directed the Board of Councillors to reconsider the matter after submission of the modified plan.

The principle is useful for arguing that where deficiencies/deviations are capable of being addressed under the Building Rules, the municipal authority should examine a modified/revised plan rather than mechanically reject the proposal.

Suparna Bhattacharya v. Rajpur-Sonarpur Municipality & Ors.

 

Suparna Bhattacharya v. Rajpur-Sonarpur Municipality & Ors.

Calcutta High Court, decided on 5 July 2019

This is the first case I would rely upon for a Rajpur-Sonarpur Municipality matter.

The dispute specifically concerned an unauthorised construction on the second floor of a building under the jurisdiction of Rajpur-Sonarpur Municipality. The Municipal authority had recorded that a revised plan had been submitted in respect of the alleged unauthorised construction.

The Division Bench ultimately directed the Municipality:

“to consider the revised plan submitted by the respondent No.3 and pass necessary decision in respect thereof”

and directed that the decision should be a reasoned one.

The Court further observed that, after the status-quo order had been vacated, there was no embargo on the Municipal authority considering the revised plan.

This is extremely relevant because:

• the property was within Rajpur-Sonarpur Municipality;
• the allegation was unauthorised construction;
• a revised building plan had been submitted;
• the Court did not direct automatic demolition merely because unauthorised construction was alleged;
• instead, it directed the Municipality to consider the revised plan and take a reasoned decision.

Another Gujarati Has Appeared

 

Another Gujarati Has Appeared to Save the World!

 Another Gujarati Has Appeared to Save the World!

Once again, the world is witnessing the emergence of a Gujarati whose vision, determination, and contribution are being presented as significant on the global stage. History will remember those individuals who dare to think beyond their immediate surroundings and aspire to leave a lasting mark on the destiny of humanity.

The Gujarati spirit has long been associated with enterprise, resilience, ambition, and the ability to think on a global scale. Whenever an individual rises to international prominence, the significance of that achievement lies not merely in personal recognition, but in the lasting impact of their actions on society, the nation, and the wider world.

However, the real measure of greatness is not the claim of saving the world; it is the tangible contribution made towards peace, prosperity, justice, human dignity, and the welfare of ordinary people. History ultimately distinguishes between grand declarations and achievements that genuinely stand the test of time.

Unforgettable contributions deserve to be remembered, examined, and judged by their enduring impact on humanity. The world needs visionaries who can translate ambition into meaningful action and leadership into responsibility.

Let time be the ultimate judge of every claim, every achievement, and every legacy.

JAI HIND! 🇮🇳

— Ashok Kumar Singh
Advocate, High Court, Calcutta