The Madras High Court has refused to interfere with an order passed by a Revenue Divisional Officer (RDO) in Nagapattinam district to demolish a two-storey building since the tenants complained of it sinking in loose soil, thereby posing a threat not only to its occupants but also to the neighbours.
Disposing of a writ appeal, the first Division Bench of Chief Justice Sanjay V. Gangapurwala and Justice D. Bharatha Chakravarthy upheld Justice M. Dhandapani’s June 19, 2023, order dismissing a writ petition filed by the property owner, Naji Bunisha Jaburi Mohamed, in 2018 challenging the RDO’s order.
“A government engineer’s report suggests that the building is not repairable and should be demolished since it is unfit for habitation. The learned single judge has passed orders after considering the report of the experts. In view of that, we do not find any infirmity in the order of the learned single judge,” the Bench wrote.
The judges took note that the appellant had purchased 3,250 square feet of land at Agarakeerungudi village and constructed a two-storey building after obtaining approval from the local planning authorities. However, on May 4, 2018, the tenants approached the revenue officials raising concerns over its stability.
After obtaining a report from a government engineer, the RDO passed an order on September 15, 2018, to demolish the building. The order was passed by exercising the powers conferred on revenue officials, under Section 133(i)(iv) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, to order the removal/repair of unsafe buildings.
When the writ petition was taken up for final hearing in March this year, Justice Dhandapani suo motu impleaded the Head of the Department of Civil Engineering at Anna University, Chennai, for appointing an expert to assess the condition of the building. The expert opined that the bearing capacity of the soil was very poor.
The court was also told that the building had undergone severe sinking and tilting. Suggesting a soil investigation at the site, the expert said if the soil was found to be very poor and beyond the scope of stabilisation, the building would have to be demolished.
