VIKAS SINGH v. GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS.

p. 884 Copy page pinpoint

A height of stilt parking can be denied sanction, on the ground of want of fire clearance from the Fire Service Authority.

59Copy pinpoint59. Ms. Aishwarya Bhati, learned Additional Solicitor General, appearing for the Delhi Government and the Fire Service Authorities submitted a compilation of documents to indicate the grounds on which the Fire Service Authorities had objected to the building plan. The Fire Service Authorities contended that the matter had been examined in the light of Gazette Notification dated 23 rd September 2013, issued by the Government of India which stated that the maximum height of the building shall be 15 meters in plots without stilt parking and 17.5 meter in plots with stilt parking and that such residential buildings shall not be construed as high rise buildings for the purpose of fire and life safety requirements and clearance of Fire Department would be obtained by the original owner.

60Copy pinpoint60. According to the fire service authorities, on compliance of the minimum standards for fire prevention and fire safety in respect of the various kinds of occupancy specified above, fire clearance is granted. The minimum standards for fire prevention and fire safety of buildings are as provided in the Building Bye-Laws and/or the National Building Code of India relating to :-

E (1) Access to building (2) Number, Width, Type and Arrangement of exits. (3) Protection of Exits by means of fire check door (s) and or pressurization.

F (4) Compartmentation. (5) Smoke Management System. (6) Fire Extinguishers. (7) First-Aid Hose Reels. G (8) Automatic fire detection and alarming system. (9) MOEFA. (10) Public Address System.

H (11) Automatic Sprinkler System.

VIKAS SINGH v. GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS. 885 [INDIRA BANERJEE J.]

(12) Internal Hydrants and Yard Hydrants. A (13) Pumping Arrangements. (14) Captive Water Storage for fire fighting. (15) Exit Signage. B (16) Provision of Lifts. (17) Standby power supply (18) Refuge Area. (19) Fire Control Room C (20) Special Fire Protection Systems for Protection of special Risks,:

61Copy pinpoint61. In this case, it is a matter of record that the application of the Appellant for revised building plan has been rejected on the sole ground D that the Appellant had not removed the lacunae pointed out by the Fire Service Authorities.

62Copy pinpoint62. The provisions of Part 4 of the National Building Code of India relating to fire and life safety requirements applies to all high rise buildings and special buildings specified in clause 1.2(b) of Part 4 of the E National Building Code of India. The requirements have no application to residential buildings which are not high rise buildings.

63Copy pinpoint63. The Fire Service Authorities also observed that the provisions of fire safety clearance and provisions for arrangements such as open spaces, alternate staircase, internal road, 6 meters wide surrounding the building etc. were vital from the point of view of life safety considerations. These arrangements are applicable to multi-storeyed and/or High Rise Buildings.

64Copy pinpoint64. The Fire Service Authorities contend that buildings beyond 15 meters in height irrespective of the type occupancy, pose different challenges in rescue and firefighting operations. The fire protection requirement in respect of residential buildings is set forth in a Table being annexure R-1 to the counter affidavit which is reproduced hereinbelow”:-

p. 886 Copy page pinpoint

A “Annexure-RI COMPARISON OF FIRE PROTECTION REQUIREMENTS: RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS-APARTMENT HOUSES

VIKAS SINGH v. GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS. 887 [INDIRA BANERJEE J.]

65Copy pinpoint65. It is stated that the Fire Service Authorities are in a dilemma as the notification of 23rd September 2013 clarifies that residential buildings with stilt parking having height of 17.5 meters or less, shall not be considered as high rise buildings, but the notification does not clarify whether it shall be out of the ambit of fire safety requirements of open spaces, alternate staircase, etc. that are mandatory for buildings having height of 15 meters or more.

66Copy pinpoint66. Having made the aforesaid observations, the Chief Fire Officer kept approval on hold on the following grounds : “1. All around 6 meters motorable road for fire tender movement was not provided around the building as per C Clause 11.3(d) of the Building Bye- Laws 1983/4.6(b) of NBC Part 3

2. Alternate staircase was not provided as per Clause 16.3.4 of the Building By-Laws 1983. 6.1.3.4(b) of the National Building Code of India, Part-4; D

3. Width of the staircase was not mentioned on the Building Plan; and

4. Fire fighting arrangements as per the National Building Code of Indi, Part-4, Fire and Life Safety were not proposed on the building plans.” E

67Copy pinpoint67. Under Section 32 of the Delhi Fire Service Act 2007, multi- storeyed buildings are governed by the fire prevention and fire safety measures, stipulated in Sections 33, 34 and 35 of the said Act. The building of the Appellant, under construction is not a multi-storeyed building. F

68Copy pinpoint68. Sub-section (s) of Section 2 of the Delhi Fire Service Act defines multi-storeyed buildings to mean a building of such minimum height as may be prescribed under the Rules in this behalf and notified to the Director by the local authority. Local authority has been defined in sub- section Q to include the DDA, the Municipal Corporation of Delhi G established under the Delhi Municipal Corporation Act, 1957 or any other authority as might be notified by the Central Government or the Government, as the case may be. SDMC is a local authority contemplated in sub-Section (q) of Section 2 of the Delhi Fire Service Act. H

p. 888 Copy page pinpoint

69Copy pinpoint69. As noted above, there does not appear to be any prescription of minimum height or intimation to the Director of the Delhi Fire Service, as required under Section 2(s) of the Delhi Fire Service Act. The Building Bye-laws 1983 and the Unified Building Bye-laws read with the Master Plan would have to be deemed as Prescription and Notification under Section 2(s). In any case, in view of Section 53 and 53A of the B DD Act, the Master Plan and the Building Rules, Regulations and Building Bye-laws under the DD Act would prevail in case of inconsistency with any other Rules or Regulations.

70Copy pinpoint70. Section 32 of the Delhi Fire Service Act provides that notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained in the said Act, multi- C storeyed buildings are to be governed by the provisions of the fire provision and fire safety measures thereafter stipulated.

71Copy pinpoint71. Chapter V of the Fire Service Rules requires the Fire Prevention Wing under the charge of a Chief Fire Officer to examine building plans referred to the Fire Service Wing by any local authority or any statutory authority from the fire prevention and fire safety point of view and issue directives relating to fire prevention and fire safety measures for compliance by the builder, owner or occupier. The fire prevention wing is also empowered to study the fire accidents in the National Capital Territory of Delhi and assist in the framing of policies relating to fire prevention and fire safety and matters similar and/or incidental thereto.

72Copy pinpoint72. Rule 27 of the Fire Service Rules, enumerates the classes of occupancies which are likely to cause risk of fire. Residential buildings (other than hotels and guest houses), having height above 15 meters or having ground plus four upper storeys, including Mezzanine floors are deemed to cause risk of fire.

73Copy pinpoint73. Under Rule 28 of the Fire Service Rules, the minimum height of the buildings, for the purposes of sub-section (1) of Section 33 and sub- section (1) of Section 35 of the Fire Service Act, would be, as specified in Rule 27, that is, height more than 15 meters or ground plus four upper storeys in case of residential buildings. Height more than 15 metres would necessarily have to be construed as height more than 15 metres without stilt parking or excluding the height of stilt parking within the limits as prescribed.

74Copy pinpoint74. Section 33 relating to inspection of buildings and/or premises for ascertaining the adequacy or contravention of fire protection and H

VIKAS SINGH v. GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS. 889 [INDIRA BANERJEE J.]

fire safety measures, applies only to buildings, as specified, of minimum A height as specified in Rule 33 of the Fire Services Rules. The minimum standards for fire prevention and fire safety for buildings, as stipulated in Rule 33, for the purposes of Sections 33 and 35 of the Fire Service Act, are applicable as per the height of the building and class of occupancy as provided in Building Bye-laws or National Building Code of India, B 2005.

75Copy pinpoint75. As per the proviso to Rule 33 in case of classes of occupancies or buildings or premises for which fire prevention and fire safety measures are not provided in the Building bye-laws or National Building Code of India 2005, the Director may require the owner or occupier of such occupancies or buildings or premises to provide fire prevention and safety measures in accordance with international standards as may be provided by the Fire Prevention wing.

76Copy pinpoint76. As per the Second proviso, where the Government is of the opinion that it is necessary or expedient so to do, it may, by order, for reasons to be recorded in writing, relax or modify or annul any requirement concerning the fire prevention and fire safety measures under these Rules, with respect to any class of occupancy, in any building or premises in special areas or in respect of any building or premises in any area that was constructed or which was under construction prior to the date of enforcement of these Rules. E

77Copy pinpoint77. Similarly, where the Director is of the opinion that it is necessary, or expedient so to do, it may for reasons to be recorded in writing, require the owner or occupier of the buildings or premise to provide additional fire prevention and fire safety measures.

78Copy pinpoint78. Rule 34 of the Delhi Fire Service Rules provides that, on receipt of a reference from the local authority or any other statutory authority, the Fire Prevention Wing may require the owner or occupier to modify the building plans to ensure the compliance of the Delhi Fire Service Rules, fire prevention and fire safety measures are to be issued within three weeks from the date of presentation under sub-rule (2) or modification of building plans as may be required under sub-rule (3) if any.

79Copy pinpoint79. Rule 35 casts an obligation on the Director, or any other officer(s) authorized by the Rules, to issue a Fire Safety Certificate in the requisite form, if the application is accompanied with a certificate H

p. 890 Copy page pinpoint

A from the Architect and owner or occupier stating that all the fire prevention and fire safety measures as required under Rule 33 have been incorporated in the building or premises. Rule 35 only applies to high rise buildings.

80Copy pinpoint80. On receipt of application, the building might be inspected by a team of fire officers to ascertain the availability or operability of the fire prevention and fire safety measures.

81Copy pinpoint81. As observed above, multi-storeyed buildings are governed by the provisions for fire prevention and fire safety measures stipulated in Chapter VI of the Delhi Fire Service Rules.

82Copy pinpoint82. Building bye-laws have been defined in Section 2(c) to mean bye- laws made under the Delhi Cantonment Act, 1924, the Delhi Municipal Corporation Act 1957, the New Delhi Municipal Council Act, 1994 or the regulations made under sub-section (1) of Section 57 of the Delhi Development Act, 1957 or the bye-laws made by the Central Government by publication in the Official Gazette, relating to buildings in D Delhi. The prevalent bye-laws and in particular 1.3.3 of the Unified Building Bye-Laws issued by the DDA makes it amply clear that the words and expressions used in the bye-laws would have the same meaning or sense as in the DD Act. Bye-law 1.3.3 makes it absolutely clear that all Master Plan/Development Control Regulations regarding use, coverage, F.A.R., set-backs, open spaces, height, number of storeys, number of dwelling units, parking standards etc. for various categories of buildings including modifications therein made from time to time shall be applicable mutatis- mutandis to the Building Regulations. In view of the Master Plan read with building bye-laws, high rise building/multi- storeyed building would mean a building taller than 15 meter without stilt or 17.5 metre with stilt.

83Copy pinpoint83. “Multi-storeyed building” is defined in Section 2(s) of the Fire Service Act to mean a building with such minimum height, as may be prescribed under the rules in this behalf, and notified to the Director by the local authority. “local authority” has been defined in Section 2(q) of the Fire Service Act to mean the Delhi Cantonment Board established under the Cantonment Act, 1924 (2 of 1924), the Delhi Development Authority, the Municipal Corporation of Delhi, the New Delhi Municipal Council Act or any other Authority under any other law which might be notified in this behalf by the Central Government or the Government, as the case may be. H

VIKAS SINGH v. GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS. 891 [INDIRA BANERJEE J.]

84Copy pinpoint84. In the absence of any specific prescription of height in terms of Section 2(s) of the Delhi Fire Service Act or notification to the Director, the Master Plan read with the applicable Building Bye-laws, is to be deemed the prescribed height notified in terms of Section 2(s). The prescribed height is deemed to be height not exceeding 15 meters without parking stilt and/or excluding the height of the stilt parking, upto the maximum limit permitted.

85Copy pinpoint85. Rule 27(2) of the Delhi Fire Service Rules which reads Residential Buildings (other than hotels and guest houses) having height more than 15 meters or having ground plus four upper storeys including mezzanine floor, has to be construed as residential building having height more than 15 meters excluding stilt. It is implicit in the Fire Safety Rules C that only buildings with stilt parking, exceeding 17.5 meters in height, would be considered as high rise building and/or multi-storeyed building.

86Copy pinpoint86. The prayers in the Writ Petition filed in the High Court for amendment of Rule 27 of the Fire Service Rules are misconceived. There are no cogent grounds of challenge to Rule 27 of the Fire Service D Rules. Height prescriptions, as stated above, differ from place to place, based upon in depth study and consideration of all relevant factors. There could be no question of this Court directing the Lieutenant Governor of the National Capital Territory of Delhi to amend Rule 27. What is required is a meaningful purposive construction of Rule 27, in the light of the DD E Act and the applicable Building Bye-laws read with the Master Plan, as amended.

87Copy pinpoint87. The Appellants have referred to the Calcutta Municipal Corporation Building Rules 2009 and Building Regulations applicable to several other cities to demonstrate that Rule 27 of the Fire Service Rules F is discriminatory. The Rules and Regulations referred to have been made by the States under their own Statutes. There cannot be any uniform prescribed height for buildings all over the country. It is for the relevant rule making authority to take a decision with regard to height of a building for the requisite level of safety including fire safety, taking into account all relevant factors; such as topography, propensity to seismic turbulence G of the region, population density, traffic, etc.

88Copy pinpoint88. The arguments advanced on behalf of the Appellant, in the High Court have duly been recorded in paragraph 6 of the impugned judgment and order. The said paragraph is extracted hereinbelow for convenience:- H

p. 892 Copy page pinpoint

A “6. The senior counsel for the petitioner: (a) has drawn our attention to Delhi Building Bye-Laws 1983; (i) Bye-law 2.1 whereof defines “Act” as the Delhi Development Act, 1957; B (ii) Bye-law 2.51 whereof defines “Master Plan” as the Master Plan for Delhi approved by the Central Government under the Delhi Development Act, 1957 and the amendments made from time to time; (iii) Bye-law 2.02 whereof provides that the words and expressions not defined in the Bye-laws shall have the same meaning or sense as in the Delhi Municipal Corporation Act, 1957, Delhi Development Act and the Master Plan for Delhi; (iv) Bye-law 2.03 whereof provides that all mandatory Master Plan/Zonal Plan regulations regarding coverage, floor area ratio, use, set-backs, open spaces, height, number of storeys, number of dwelling units, parking standards etc. for various categories of buildings including modifications thereof made from time to time shall be applicable mutatis mutandis in the building regulations and that all amendments/modifications made in the building regulations will automatically be included as part of the Bye-laws; (v) Bye-law 2.36 whereof defines “Floor Area Ratio (FAR)” as the quotient obtained by dividing the total covered area (plinth area) on all floors multiplied by 100 by the area of the plot; F (vi) Bye-law 2.58 whereof defines “Parking Space” as an area enclosed or unenclosed, covered or open, sufficient in size to park vehicles, together with a driveway connecting the parking space with a street or alley and permitting ingress and egress of the vehicles; G (vii) Bye-law 3.1 whereof provides that in addition to the provision of the Delhi Development Act, the Building Bye- laws shall apply to the building regulation activity, in the Union Territory of Delhi under the jurisdiction of the Delhi Development Authority (DDA); H

VIKAS SINGH v. GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS. 893 [INDIRA BANERJEE J.]

(viii) Appendix J whereof containing ‘Relevant Extracts from A MPD- 2021 regarding Development Control Regulations’ provides the maximum height of constructions of residential plotted development, of 15 metres and further provides that if the building is constructed with stilt area of non-habitable height (less than 2.4 metres), used for parking, such stilt area B shall not be included in FAR but would be counted towards the height of the building; (b) has drawn our attention to the Notification dated 4th March, 2014 of the Ministry of Urban Development (Delhi Division) issued in exercise of powers conferred by Section 11-A(2) of the Delhi Development Act making modifications in the MPD- C 2021 and whereby the definition of High Rise Buildings in Clause 8(7) of Chapter 17 titled ‘Development Code’ of the Master Plan has been changed to “Buildings taller than 15 metres (without stilt) and 17.5 metres (including stilt) in all use zones will be considered as High Rise Buildings” and D further providing that in case of stack-parking in stilt floor, minimum height of 2.4 metres for stilt floor may be relaxed; (c) has drawn our attention to Bye-law 6.2.4.1 of the Building Bye- laws aforesaid relating to ‘Building Plans for Multistoreyed/Special Buildings which are more than 15 E metres in height and has argued that the same is by way of an exception to Bye-law 6.2.4 dealing with ‘Building Plan’ for plots measuring up to 250 sq.m. and above 250 sq.m. and has demonstrated that the building plan for such multistoreyed/special buildings has to show inter alia the location and size of fire lift, smoke exhauster system, access F to fire appliances/vehicles with details of vehicular turning circle and clear motorable access way around the building etc.; (d) has argued: G (I) that the petitioner on 15 th July, 2013 got the plan for construction on property No. C-319, Defence Colony, New Delhi sanctioned from the Municipal Corporation of Delhi (MCD);

p. 894 Copy page pinpoint

A (II) that at the time of sanction of plan, the height of the building permissible under the Bye-laws was 15 metres which included the stilt which had been made mandatory; (III) that upon amendment of the Master Plan vide Notification dated 23rd September, 2013 published on 21 st October, 2013, B maximum height of the building was prescribed as 15 metres in plot without stilt parking and 17.5 metres in plot with stilt parking and further providing that such buildings were not to be considered as high rise buildings “for the purpose of fire and life safety requirements, clearance of Fire Department will be obtained by the individual plot owner”; C (IV) that by the time, the petitioner came to know about the aforesaid amendment, he had already casted stilt as well as the ground and the first floors and the only second and third floor roof casting remained;

D (V) that in order to take advantage of the amended Master Plan, the petitioner got a revised plan made by providing two feet extra on the second and third floors, thus taking the height of the entire building to 16.16 metres, that is, well below the 17.5 metres provided in the amended Master Plan;

E (VI) that since the amended Master Plan provided for taking clearance of the Fire Department, the petitioner applied on 3rd January, 2014 and on 20th January, 2014 submitted revised building plans to the SDMC indicating therein that the petitioner shall be increasing the height of the second and third floors by two feet each to take the total height to 16.16 F metres; (VII) that on 22nd January, 2014, the MCD referred the file to the Fire Department, GNCTD; (e) has invited attention to the Delhi Fire Service Act (DFSA), 2007 and has contended: G (i) that there is no provision therein for compliance of the provisions contained therein by residential buildings; (ii) that though Section 25 thereof empowers the GNCTD to by notification in the official gazette declare any class of H

VIKAS SINGH v. GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS. 895 [INDIRA BANERJEE J.]

occupancy and pandal which are likely to cause a risk of fire A but the GNCTD has not issued any notification; (iii) that Section 32 thereof requires only the ‘multistoreyed buildings’ to be governed by the provisions for the fire prevention and fire safety measures stipulated therein; (iv) that the said measures are contained in the Delhi Fire B Service Rules supra; (f) has invited attention to Rule 27 of the Rules supra listing the classes of occupancies to be construed as likely to cause a risk of fire and serial No. 2 whereof contains residential buildings (other than hotels and guest houses) having height more than 15 metres or having ground plus four upper storeys including mezzanine floor; (g) has contended, (I) that once the Master Plan has changed the maximum height of residential building from 15 metres to 17.5 metres and which change as per the provisions aforesaid of the Building Bye-laws stands incorporated in the Building Bye-laws also, the rules cannot be permitted to continue classifying residential buildings of more than 15 metres but less than 17.5 metres height as posing risk of fire; E (II) that rules aforesaid cannot be contrary to and have to be subservient to the Central Government legislation; (III) that even otherwise Section 25 of the DFSA entitles the Government to declare only a class of occupancy, as likely to F cause a risk of fire and not by height; (IV) that the rule aforesaid is arbitrary per se and the height of 15 metres contained therein, after the amendment of the Master Plan and the consequent amendment of the Building Bye-laws will have to be read as 17.5 metres; G (V) that the GNCTD, post the amendment of the Master Plan and the Building Bye-laws, ought to have amended the Rules, but has failed to do so;

p. 896 Copy page pinpoint

A (VI) that even the Development Code was amended on 4 th March, 2014 in consonance with the amendments to the Master Plan; (VII) that the height of the occupancy, even after the amendment aforesaid, remains 15 metres only and only to deal with the B paucity of parking in streets in front of residential houses and to provide for parking, stilt floor in each residential building has been made compulsory; (VIII) that the rules aforesaid framed by the GNCTD cannot have priority over the Master Plan or Building Bye-laws; C (IX) that to hold that a residential building of more than 15 metres but less than 17.5 metres height becomes a multi- storeyed building or a high rise building, would be absurd inasmuch as the plot size of such building does not admit of a provision being made for two staircases, or providing for movement of a fire brigade all around the building and to hold so would also be contrary to the layout plan of the building prescribing front and rear set-backs only; (X) that the Supreme Court in para 66 of Delhi Bar Association (Regd.) v. Union of India (2008) 13 SCC 628 has held that law framed by the GNCTD if repugnant to central law, would be void.”

89Copy pinpoint89. The Respondent Nos. 1 to 3 had filed their counter affidavit stating that under Rule 33 of the Fire Service Rules sets minimum standards for fire prevention and fire safety of buildings. The standards for fire prevention and fire safety depend on the height of the buildings and class of occupancy, as provided in the applicable Building Bye-laws or National Building Code of India. In Court it was admitted that there was no fire protection requirement for one or two family private dwellings and for residential building up to 15 metres in height.

90Copy pinpoint90. From the impugned judgment and order, it appears that, in course of arguments, the High Court inquired how increase in the height of the residential building over 16.5 metres changed the position viz-a- viz safety and fire prevention. The Chief Fire Officer explained that the floors above 15 metres could not be reached by manual ladder, having regard to the incline at which the ladder is required to be placed alongside the building. It was also argued that in case of fire in buildings above 15

VIKAS SINGH v. GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS. 897 [INDIRA BANERJEE J.]

metres in height, induction of air from outside would make fire spread very fast.

91Copy pinpoint91. There can be no doubt that any construction has to conform to regulations made in the larger interest of the inhabitants of the city, to protect environment, prevent fire, prevent accidents, provide for essential amenities etc. There can also be no doubt that regulatory provisions for construction activities are in public interest.

92Copy pinpoint92. At the same time a building which is not a high rise building as per the applicable rules or regulation cannot be compelled to comply with fire prevention and fire safety regulations applicable to high rise buildings. C

93Copy pinpoint93. It is not in dispute that the Appellant had got a plan sanctioned from the Municipal Corporation of Delhi on 15th July 2013. At that time the height of the building permissible under Bye-laws was 15 metres which included the stilt, which had been made mandatory. It is also not in dispute that upon amendment of the Master Plan by Notification D dated 23rd September 2013 published on 21st October 2013 maximum height of the building was prescribed as 15 metres without stilt parking and 17.5 metres with stilt parking. After the amendment, the Master Plan provides that buildings up to 15 metres without stilt parking and 17.5 metres with stilt parking are not be to considered as high rise and for the purpose of fire and life safety requirements, clearance of Fire E Department was to be obtained by the individual plot owner. The Appellant was entitled in law to take advantage of the amended Master Plan for Delhi and he accordingly applied to SDMC for sanction of revised plan on 20th January 2014. The revised plan was referred to the Delhi Fire Service Authorities by SDMC on 22nd January 2014. F

94Copy pinpoint94. Under clause 8.0 of the Unified Building Bye-Laws for Delhi 2016, clearance from Delhi Fire Service is mandatory only for High Rise Building. The Building of the Appellant, under construction is not a High Rise Building, for the reasons discussed. Clearance from the Delhi Fire Service is therefore, not mandatory for sanction of the Revised G Building Plan submitted by the Appellant.

95Copy pinpoint95. There can be no doubt that the Appellant must comply with safety requirements including fire requirements necessary for buildings which are not high rise. However, rules applicable to High Rise Buildings cannot be applied to buildings which are not High Rise Buildings. H

p. 898 Copy page pinpoint

96Copy pinpoint96. The challenge to Rule 27(2) of the Fire Service Rules was misconceived and the High Court rightly rejected the challenge to the said Rule. It is also well settled that orders in the nature of Mandamus directing a rule making authority to amend Rules is not granted by the High Court in proceedings under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The High Court rightly refused to pass any such order. B

97Copy pinpoint97. The High Court, however erred in dismissing the Writ Petition without granting any relief to the Appellant. The High Court might have moulded the relief sought in terms of Prayer C.

98Copy pinpoint98. Admittedly the building in question does not exceed 17.5 meter C with parking stilt. As stated above, height exceeding 15 meter to qualify as high rise building must be construed as height exceeding 15 meter without stilt parking and/or excluding the permissible height of stilt parking as per the building regulations read with the Master Plan of Delhi. The building in question is not a high rise building.

99Copy pinpoint99. Irrespective of whether fire clearance is mandatory in respect of the buildings, which are not high rise, it is open to the SDMC to get clearance from the fire service authorities to ensure that fire safety measures are not contravened. However, as admitted on behalf of the fire service authorities, fire clearance is granted subject to compliance of minimum standards for fire prevention and fire safety in respect of the kind of occupancy as provided in the building bye-laws and/or the National Building Code of India. Provisions of Building Regulations and/ or Bye-laws and/or National Building Code, not applicable to high rise buildings are not attracted in the case of the building in question.

100Copy pinpoint100. The Fire Service Authorities can only ensure that the buildings comply with fire safety requirements, if any, applicable to residential buildings, which do not fall within the ambit of high rise buildings.

101Copy pinpoint101. The argument that the Fire Service Authorities do not have ladders of adequate length to tackle outbreak of fire in buildings exceeding 15 meter is fallacious and cannot be ground to deny the owner of property, the right to carry out construction at his property, in accordance with the applicable building laws, read with the Master Plan for Delhi, and thereby deprive the owner of his right to effectively utilise his property.

102Copy pinpoint102. There is no prohibition on construction of buildings exceeding 15 meters in height. The dispute is with regard to classification of the buildings- Whether such buildings are to be classified as high rise and

VIKAS SINGH v. GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS. 899 [INDIRA BANERJEE J.]

subjected to specific Rules and Regulations applicable to high rise buildings. The difference in height is only about 4/5 feet. The height is well within 17.5 meter with stilt parking as provided in the Master Plan. If the Delhi Fire Service Department does not have ladders to tackle fire in buildings exceeding 15 meters even by a few feet, existing buildings exceeding 15 Meters in height and their inhabitants are doomed. B It is preposterous to even think that multi-storeyed buildings would be left to their own fire fighting facilities and their own existing staircase in case of outbreak of fire. The argument seems preposterous. If the Fire Service authorities do not have adequate fire fighting equipment, they would necessarily have to acquire the same in the interest of the people.

103Copy pinpoint103. We need not go into the question of whether any clearance C of the Fire Service Authorities is at all necessary. However, in view of the amendment to the Master Plan for Delhi 2021, as amended in September, 2013 by S.O. No. 678(E) dated 4th March 2014, a building with stilts which is 17.5 meter or less in height cannot be considered as a high rise building. If a building is not a high rise building, it will not be D a multi- storied building.

104Copy pinpoint104. SDMC cannot keep sanction of the Revised Building Plan submitted by the Appellant, way back in January, 2014, in abeyance indefinitely. Nor can sanction be rejected on the ground of non-compliance of fire service requirements applicable to multi-storied/high rise buildings. E A decision with regard to sanction has to be taken within the time stipulated in Clause 2.3.1 of the Unified Building Bye-laws. Under Clause 2.3.3(b) of the Unified Building Bye-laws, approval/refusal of agencies, such as Delhi Fire Service must be intimated within 15 days, or the time stipulated in Chapter III of the Unified Building Bye-Laws, whichever is earlier. In other words, a decision has to be taken by the Fire Service F Authorities within a maximum period of 15 days. It hardly need be mentioned that in case of refusal, reasons are mandatory, for compliance with principles of natural justice. It may however, be open to the SDMC to obtain the opinion of the Fire Service Authorities. It is made clear that objections will not be raised on the sole ground of non-compliance of G rules not applicable to a residential building which is not a high rise building. A decision shall immediately be taken on the application for sanction of Revised Plan submitted on 14th January 2014 in the light of the observations made above, keeping in view the timelines stipulated in Clause 2.3.1 of the Unified Building Bye-laws. H

p. 900 Copy page pinpoint

105Copy pinpoint105. The SDMC may in its discretion seek clearance from the Fire Service Authority, but such clearance shall not be withheld on the ground of non- compliance of requisites applicable to high rise buildings, or on the frivolous ground of unavailability of ladders of adequate size to carry out inspection. If no views are expressed within the time as stipulated in the Unified Building Bye-laws and in particular Clause 2.3.3 B thereof, computed from the date of communication of this judgment and order, clearance will be deemed to have been granted.

106Copy pinpoint106. The appeal is, accordingly, allowed to the extent indicated above. The impugned order rejecting the Revised Building Plan is set aside and quashed. C

107Copy pinpoint107. The SDMC shall consider the application afresh in the light of the observations/findings given hereinabove.

Nidhi Jain Appeal partly allowed. (Assisted by : Tamana, LCRA) D