Demolition order for bungalow of J&K ex-deputy CM Nirmal Singh’s wife set aside

This followed arguments by senior advocate R K Gupta, who along with advocate Rahul Sadotra, appeared on behalf of Mamta Singh that the requisite notice under Section 7(1) of the J&K Control of Building Operations Act, 1988, was never served upon the appellant asking her to show cause as to why the construction may not be removed which is raised in violation of the building bylaws.

Pointing out that the manner of the service of notice is also prescribed in Section 7(2) of the Act, he referred to a J&K High Court’s decision in a case titled ‘BOCA vs Koushalya Devi & Others’ that the service of notice, in the case of a dispute, shall be proved to have taken place in the presence of an independent witness.

The Special Tribunal after going through the records of the JDA observed that the notice under Section 7(1) was stated to have been served on October 30, 2021. However, the manner in which it was served was not mentioned in the endorsement, including the particulars of the official serving it and the person to whom it was served, the Bench observed, adding that even it has not been recorded in the minutes of proceedings in the file.

Allowing an appeal by Mamta Singh, the Bench held that the JDA has failed to establish the valid service of the show-cause notice on the appellant, which is a mandatory pre-condition for proceeding with statutory exercise against violation of the building bylaws.

The JDA’s counsel, Adarsh Sharma, however, submitted that the demolition notice was issued as the appellant did not respond to the show-cause notice duly served upon her. Moreover, no residential construction is permissible in the area in question as the same is described in the Jammu Master Plan 2032 as “vegetation’’ and is earmarked for use as agricultural purposes.

After considering the rival contentions, the J&K Special Tribunal set aside the demolition order issued by JDA on technical grounds of a defect in the service of show-cause notice on Mamta Singh.

However, while allowing the appeal, it observed that the BOCA shall be at liberty to proceed afresh against the appellant for violation of the building bylaws by strictly adhering to the procedure prescribed under Section 7 of the COBO Act.

A whistleblower, Muzzaffar Ali Shah, had through an RTI got information that the wife of former Deputy Chief Minister had constructed the palatial bungalow without JDA’s permission. The JDA which preferred to remain silent in the matter, however, issued demolition notice after the whistleblower highlighted the matter in public.

Mamta Singh appealed against JDA’s demolition order before the Special Tribunal, saying that the plot on which the construction was raised was bought on May 20, 2014, and the area was then outside the jurisdiction of any development authority. Also, the house was built before the Jammu Master Plan, 2032, came into force which was notified on March 3, 2017, which brought 103 villages, including Ban, under the JDA jurisdiction.

Following this, the tribunal had kept in abeyance the JDA’s demolition order, asking both the parties to maintain status quo. The Army, too, has filed a petition in the J&K and Ladakh High Court, challenging the construction of the bungalow as it is located just 580 yards from the boundary wall of its ammunition sub-depot.

According to provisions of the Works of Defence Act (WoDA), 1903, any construction up to 1,000 yards from defence installation is prohibited.