Read Time: 04 minutes

Synopsis

The Madras High Court recently rejected the appeal moved against a single judge bench order whereby the challenge to the notice issued by the Revenue Divisional Officer in Nagapattinam district to order the demolition of a two-floor building was declined. 

The building had become a cause for concern due to its unstable foundation in loose soil, posing not only a threat to its occupants but also to neighboring properties.

The writ appeal was disposed of by the division bench consisting of Chief Justice Sanjay V. Gangapurwala and Justice D. Bharatha Chakravarthy, who upheld the decision made by Justice M. Dhandapani on June 19, 2023.

Justice Dhandapani had previously dismissed a writ petition filed in 2018 by the property owner, Naji Bunisha Jaburi Mohamed, challenging the RDO's order.

The decision was based on a government engineer's report, which concluded that the building was beyond repair and deemed unsafe for habitation. The single judge bench's ruling had considered this expert report, and the division bench found no fault with the decision.

The case revolved around the property owner's purchase of 3,250 square feet of land in Agarakeerungudi village and the subsequent construction of a two-storey building with approval from local planning authorities. However, on May 4, 2018, tenants raised concerns about the building's stability.

Following an assessment by a government engineer, the RDO issued an order on September 15, 2018, to demolish the building. This decision was made in accordance with the authority granted to revenue officials under Section 133(i)(iv) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, which allows them to order the removal or repair of unsafe structures.

During the writ petition's final hearing in March of the current year, Justice Dhandapani took the initiative to involve the Head of the Department of Civil Engineering at Anna University, Chennai. This expert was tasked with assessing the building's condition, and the findings indicated poor soil-bearing capacity. The court was also informed of the severe sinking and tilting of the building. The expert recommended a soil investigation at the site, suggesting that if the soil was indeed unsuitable for stabilization, the building would have to be demolished.

Case Title: Naji Bunisha Jaburimohamed v. The Revenue Divisional Officer and Others