Patna High Court
Swati AgrawalversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISMISSED
Holding
The Court held that the appellant cannot challenge the Tribunal and Commissioner orders by writ where a specific statutory appeal under Section 323(3) of the Bihar Municipality Act is available, and therefore the Letters Patent Appeal must be dismissed.
Summary
Swati Agrawal appealed against the order of the Municipal Building Tribunal directing her to submit a building plan for post‑facto sanction and the earlier order of the Municipal Commissioner that fined her father under the Bihar Municipality Act. The High Court examined whether the appellant could challenge those orders by writ when an alternative statutory remedy under Section 323(3) of the Bihar Municipality Act was available. It held that the appellant had already been directed to apply for post‑facto sanction, submitted the plan, and the Commissioner rightly rejected it for lack of required documents. The Court emphasized that the proper avenue for challenge is an appeal before the Municipal Building Tribunal, not a writ petition. Consequently, the Letters Patent Appeal was dismissed as devoid of merit, with liberty to file the statutory appeal within the prescribed period.
Issues considered
- Whether the appellant can invoke writ jurisdiction to set aside the Municipal Building Tribunal and Municipal Commissioner orders when an alternative remedy under the Bihar Municipality Act is available.
- Whether the order directing the appellant to submit a building plan for post‑facto sanction was illegal, improper or procedurally irregular.
- Whether the penalty imposed under Section 315 of the Bihar Municipality Act is justified in the absence of a prior approved building plan.
Subjects
- building byelaws
- illegal construction
- post‑facto sanction
- municipal authority
- letters patent appeal
- alternative statutory remedy
- Section 314 Bihar Municipality Act
- Section 315 Bihar Municipality Act
- municipal corporation
- writ jurisdiction
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Letters Patent Appeal No.1 of 2025
In
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.17538 of 2024
======================================================
Swati Agrawal Daughter of Late Ramesh Chand Agrawal, Resident of Purnea
Market, Bhatta Bazar, P.S. K Hat, District - Purnea.
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Urban Development and
Housing Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.
2. The Purnea Municipal Corporation, Purnea through its Municipal
Commissioner, Municipal Corporation, Purnea, Bihar.
3. The Municipal Commissioner, Purnea Municipal Corporation, District-
Purnea, Bihar.
4. The District Magistrate, Purnea, Bihar.
5. The Superintendent of Police, Purnea, Bihar.
6. The Sub Division Officer, Purnea, Bihar.
7. The Execution Engineer, Electricity Supply Division, East and West Purnea,
Bihar.
8. The Incharge of Building Maps Purnea Municipal Corporation, District
Purnea, Bihar.
9. Sri Nawal Kumar @ Nawal Kumar Jaiswal S/o Sri Raj Kumar Chaudhary,
Resident of Parwati Hat, Bhatta, P.s. Khajanchi Hat, District- Purnea.
10. Sri Lokesh Kumar Jaiswal Son of Sri Raj Kumar Chaudhary, Resident of
Parwati Hat, Bhatta, P.s. Khajanchi Hat, District- Purnea.
11. Sri Vijay Kumar Jaiswal Son of Sri Raj Kumar Chaudhary, Resident of
Parwati Hat, Bhatta, P.s. Khajanchi Hat, District- Purnea.
12. Laxman Kumar Mishra Son of Ram Pradarth Mishra Resident of Parwati
Hat, Bhatta, P.S. Khanjanchi Hat, District- Purnea.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Appellant/s : Mr. Kamal Nayan Choubey, Sr. Advocate
Mr.Ashok Kumar Garg, Advocate
Mr. Dineshwar Pandey, Advocate
For the Purnea Municipal
Corporation : Mr. Satyabir Bharti, Sr. Advocate
Mr. Prince Kumar Mishra, Advocate
Ms. Priyanka Kumari, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE
and
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK KUMAR SINHA
Patna High Court L.P.A No.1 of 2025 dt.09-02-2026
2/12
ORAL JUDGMENT
(Per: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE)
Date : 09-02-2026
This Letters Patent Appeal has been filed by Swati
Agrawal challenging the order dated 17.12.2024 passed by the
learned Single Judge in CWJC No. 17538 of 2024. The writ
petition was filed by the petitioner seeking for following reliefs:
“(i) To issue a writ/order/direction in the
nature of certiorari to set aside order dated 06.09.2024
passed by the Chairman, Municipal Building Tribunal-
1, Bihar, Patna in Appeal No.22 (N)/2023 (arising out
of Vigilance Case No.09/2022-23 of Punea Municipal
Corporation) whereby and whereunder without
interfering with the order passed in Vigilance Case
No.09/2022-23 dated 03.11.2022 the appeal of the
petitioner was dismissed with a direction that if the
petitioner submits any map plan for post facto
sanction to the Purnea Municipal Corporation, the
corporation shall consider the said map submitted by
the petitioner for regularizing the building in question
within the ambit and scope of relevant building
byelaws.
(ii) To issue a writ/order/direction in the
nature of certiorari to set aside order dated 0311.2022
passed by the Municipal Commissioner, Municipal
Corporation Purnea in Vigilance Case No.09/2022-23
whereby and whereunder Sri Ramesh Chandra
Agrawal (father of the petitioner) was held guilty of
violating of Section 314 of the Bihar Municipality
Act, 2007 and was fined Rs.10,00,000/- under section
315 of Bihar Municipality Act for violating Building
Byelaws and constructing a permanent structure and
further the said structure was directed to be sealed
under Rule 16 (Kha) of Bihar Building Byelaws 2014.
(iii) To pass interim / ex-parte interim order
staying order dated 06.09.2024 passed by the
Chairman, Municipal Building Tribunal-1, Bihar,
Patna in Appeal No.22 (N)/2023 (arising out of
Vigilance Case No.09/2022-23 of Purnea Municipal
Patna High Court L.P.A No.1 of 2025 dt.09-02-2026
3/12
Corporation) whereby and whereunder without
interfering with the order passed in Vigilance Case
No.09/2022- 23 dated 03.11.2022 the appeal of the
petitioner was dismissed with a direction that if the
petitioner submits any map plan for post facto
sanction to the Purnea Municipal Corporation, the
corporation shall consider the said map submitted by
the petitioner for regularizing the building in question
within the ambit and scope of relevant building
byelaws, during the pendency of the present writ
application.
(iv) To pass interim / ex-parte interim order
dated 03.11.2022 passed by the Municipal
Commissioner, Municipal Corporation Purnea in
Vigilance Case No.09/2922-23 whereby and
whereunder Sri Ramesh Chandra Agrawal (father of
the petitioner) was held guilty of violating of Section
314 of the Bihar Municipality Act, 2007 aud was fined
Rs.10,00,000/-under section 315 of Bibar
Municipality Act for violating Building Byelaws and
constructing a permanent structure and further the said
structure was directed to be sealed under Rule 16
(Kha) of Bihar Building Byelaws 2014, during the
pendency of the present writ application.”
2. The learned Single Judge vide impugned order dated
17.12.2024 passed in CWJC No. 17538 of 2024, has been
pleased to hold as follows:-
“14. It is an admitted fact that the building
has been constructed without sanctioning of the
map/building plan which is a violation of Section 314
of the Act 2007. Though it is the averment of the
petitioner that a building plan/map has been
submitted to the Municipal Corporation for its
approval but this averment is denied by the Municipal
Corporation. There is no evidence at all showing that
the petitioner has applied for sanctioning of the
building plan or map. The Municipal Building
Tribunal, vide order dated 06.09.2024, directed the
petitioner to submit a building plan/map for post-
facto sanction to the Purnea Municipal Corporation
Patna High Court L.P.A No.1 of 2025 dt.09-02-2026
4/12
and it was also observed that the Corporation shall
consider the said map submitted by the appellant for
regularizing the building in question within the ambit
and scope of the relevant bye-laws.
15. I do not find any illegality, impropriety
or irregularity in the order dated 06.09.2024 passed
by the Municipal Building Tribunal-01 in Appeal
No.22(N) 2023 as well as in order dated 14.11.2024
as contained in memo no. 4847, passed by the
Municipal Commissioner, Municipal Corporation,
Purnea.”
3. It has been submitted that the building which has
been sealed is entirely different from the building in respect of
which the notice was issued and, therefore, the order of sealing
of the premises is wholly arbitrary and frustrates the ends of
justice. It is further contended that the Municipal Commissioner,
Purnea Municipal Corporation has imposed the maximum
penalty which was neither proper nor justified. The order of the
Commissioner imposing such penalty therefore suffers from non
application of mind.
4. Per contra, the learned senior counsel appearing on
behalf of the Purnea Municipal Corporation submits that the
contention advanced by the learned counsel for the appellant
was neither raised before the writ court nor earlier before any of
the competent authorities and, therefore, such a plea cannot be
entertained for the first time in the present Letters Patent
Appeal. It is further pointed out that Section 313, 314, and 315
Patna High Court L.P.A No.1 of 2025 dt.09-02-2026
5/12
of the Bihar Municipal Act, 2007 deals respectively with the
prohibition of construction without sanction; sanction of
building plans and construction raised in contravention to the
building by-laws, for which penal consequences are prescribed.
5. The learned senior counsel for the Purnea Municipal
Corporation further submits that during the pendency of the
proceedings before the Municipal Building Tribunal, an order
dated 06.09.2024 was passed directing the appellant to submit
the building plan/map before the corporation for post-facto
sanction. The Tribunal observed that the Corporation shall
examine the said plan/map for the purpose of regularisation of
the building in question, strictly in accordance with the
applicable building by-laws. It was contended that pursuant to
and in compliance with the aforesaid order dated 06.09.2024
passed by the Chairman, Building Tribunal, the appellant
submitted the plan/map seeking post-facto approval. Having
acted in consonance with the said order, the appellant was not
justified in assailing the same before the writ court. It was
further submitted that the competent authority, namely the
Municipal Commissioner, declined approval of the plan/map on
the ground of non-submission of requisite documents, namely:
(i) record of rights/original sale deed/lease deed/decree of the
Patna High Court L.P.A No.1 of 2025 dt.09-02-2026
6/12
court (ii) rent receipt (iii) Corporation holding receipt (iv) land
possession certificate (v) development agreement between the
land owner and the builder, if any.
6. The learned senior counsel appearing for the Purnea
Municipal corporation also submits that Bihar Municipal Act,
2007 provides a specific statutory remedy inasmuch as, any
person aggrieved by an order passed by the Chief Municipal
Officer, in the present case the Municipal Commissioner, may
prefer an appeal under Section 323(3) before the Municipal
Building Tribunal constituted under Section 329 of the Bihar
Municipal Act, 2007. It was further contended that once an
efficacious alternative remedy is available to the appellant
against the rejection of the plan/map seeking post-facto
sanction, the present Letters Patent Appeal is wholly
misconceived.
7. The Bihar Municipal Act, 2007 was enacted to
consolidate and amend the laws relating to the Municipal
Government in the State of Bihar in conformity with the
provisions of the Constitution of India as amended by the
Constitution (74th Amendment Act, 1992). The Act is founded
on the principles of decentralization; participatory governance;
autonomy, and accountability of urban local bodies at various
Patna High Court L.P.A No.1 of 2025 dt.09-02-2026
7/12
levels, and seeks to introduce reforms in financial management
and accounting system, enhance internal resource generation
capacity and strengthen organizational design of municipalities,
to ensure professionalization of the municipal personnel and
regulate matters connected therewith or incidental thereto. In
Part-I of the Chapter-1 of Bihar Municipal Act, 2007, the
expression “Chief Municipal” Officer has been defined under
Section 2(21) which clearly states that in relation to a Municipal
Corporation, the Chief Municipal Officer is the Municipal
Commissioner whereas in relation to a Municipal Council or
Nagar Panchayat it refers to the Municipal Executive Officer.
Chapter-XXXVI of the Bihar Municipal Act, 2007 deals with
buildings and Section 313, falling under the said chapter, places
a statutory prohibition on the construction of any building or
permanent structure or the execution of any work relating to
construction of building including addition, alteration or
modification of an existing building, within any municipal area,
save and except in accordance with the applicable building bye-
laws. Section 314 of Bihar Municipal Act, 2007 prescribes the
procedure for sanction of building plans, while Section 315
provides for the imposition of penalty in cases where
construction of the building is carried out in contravention of the
Patna High Court L.P.A No.1 of 2025 dt.09-02-2026
8/12
building bye-laws.
8. The Bihar Building Bye Laws, 2014 have been
framed in exercise of the powers conferred under Section 321 of
the Bihar Municipal Act, 2007 and Section 81(2)(w) of the
Bihar Urban Planning and Development Act, 2012 and the Bihar
Building Bye Laws, 2014, as amended in the year 2022
prescribes Form No.II, namely the ‘Building Plan Application
Form’ which enumerates the documents required to be furnished
by an applicant seeking permission to erect, re-erect, demolish
or carry out any addition or alteration a building.
9. When the matter was placed before the Municipal
Building Tribunal, an order dated 06.09.2024 was passed
directing the appellant to submit a building plan/map before the
Purnea Municipal Corporation for the purpose of post-facto
sanction. The Tribunal further observed that the Corporation
shall consider the plan/map submitted by the appellant for
regularization of the building in question strictly within the
ambit and scope of the relevant building bye-laws. Pursuant
thereto, the appellant submitted the building plan/map seeking
post-facto sanction before the Purnea Municipal Corporation,
which necessarily presupposed that no prior approved building
plan/map existed. Upon scrutiny, the competent authority found
Patna High Court L.P.A No.1 of 2025 dt.09-02-2026
9/12
that the requisite documents, as mandated under the applicable
bye-laws, has not been furnished along with the application.
Consequently, the application for post-facto sanction was
rejected by order dated 15.01.2025, as contained in Annexure-
R/5 to the counter affidavit.
10. In view of the aforesaid facts and statutory scheme,
this Court finds substance in the submission advanced on behalf
of the corporation that an efficacious alternative statutory
remedy is available to the appellant against the order of
rejection as clearly delineated under sub-section (3) of Section
323 of the Bihar Municipal Act, 2007.
It provides that if any person aggrieved by an order of
the Chief Municipal Officer, in the present case the Municipal
Commissioner under sub section (1), he may prefer an appeal
within a period of 30 days from the date of order before the
Municipal Building Tribunal constituted under Section 329 of
the Bihar Municipal Act, 2007. The Municipal Building
Tribunal has been constituted by the State Government to hear
and decide appeals arising out of orders relating to the sanction
of building plans by the Municipal Authorities, in accordance
with the prescribed procedure, and to realise such fees in
connection with such appeals as may be notified by the
Patna High Court L.P.A No.1 of 2025 dt.09-02-2026
10/12
Government under Section 329 of the Bihar Municipal Act,
2007. In view of the aforesaid statutory framework we are of the
considered opinion that once the appellant, in compliance with
the order dated 06.09.2024 passed by the Municipal Building
Tribunal, submitted the building plan/map seeking post-facto
approval before the competent authority, it was not open to the
appellant to assail the very same order by invoking the writ
jurisdiction of this Court. We also find that learned Single Judge
was fully justified in holding that no illegality, impropriety or
procedural irregularity is discernible in the order dated
06.09.2024 passed by the Municipal Building Tribunal in
Appeal No. 22(N)/2023 (arising out of Vigilance Case
No.09/2022-23 of Purnea Municipal Corporation) as well as the
order dated 03.11.2022 passed by the Municipal Commissioner
of Municipal Corporation, Purnea.
11. It is a settled proposition of law that, in a Letters
Patent Appeal, the Division Bench ordinarily ought not to
interfere with the findings of fact recorded by the learned Single
Judge, unless such findings are demonstrated to be wholly
unsupported by evidence, perverse, manifestly unreasonable or
contrary to settled principle of law. The scope of interference in
appellant jurisdiction under a Letters Patent Appeal is
Patna High Court L.P.A No.1 of 2025 dt.09-02-2026
11/12
circumscribed and limited. Such jurisdiction is essentially
corrective in nature and is exercised sparingly, only to rectify
patent errors, if any.
12. Upon a careful consideration of the impugned order
passed by the learned writ Court, we are of the considered view
that no perversity can be attributed thereto. This conclusion is
further fortified by the fact that an efficacious, alternative
remedy is available with the Appellant to challenge the order
passed by the Commissioner before the Municipal Building
Tribunal, in accordance with law. In such circumstances,
interference in exercise of writ jurisdiction is neither warranted
nor justified.
13. Needless to say that since the period prescribed for
filing the appeal under Section 323(3) of Bihar Municipal Act,
2007 is already over, if an application is filed for condoning the
delay, the same shall be favorably considered by the Municipal
Building Tribunal and appeal shall be heard on merits.
14. Accordingly, the Letters Patent Appeal is devoid of
merit and is hereby dismissed with liberty as aforesaid to file an
appeal under Section 323(3) of the Bihar Municipal Act, 2007
within 30 days from the date of passing of this order.
15. All pending I.As, if any, stands disposed of.
Patna High Court L.P.A No.1 of 2025 dt.09-02-2026
12/12
16. It is made clear that the Court has not expressed any
opinion on the merits of the claim of the appellant.
(Sangam Kumar Sahoo, CJ)
(Alok Kumar Sinha, J)
ranjan/prakash-
AFR/NAFR
CAV DATE NA
Uploading Date 11.02.2026
Transmission Date NA
Checking your session…