JUDGMENT D.S. Mathur, J. - This is a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution by Kailash Chandra Nigam for the issue of a writ of certiorari to quash the notice dated 18-12-1961, Annexure IV to the affidavit, issued by the Prescribed Authority Regulated Area, Kanpur under Section 10 of the U.P. (Regulation of Building Operations) Act, 1958 (to be referred hereinafter as the Act) 2. The material facts of the case are that after the purchase of houses Nos. 40171 and 40172 situate in Parade, Kanpur, the petitioner submitted plans for the construction of one three storeyed building in place of the old houses. When the then Municipal Board did not pass final orders within the prescribed period the plans were deemed to have been approved and the petitioner started constructions of the building. The Municipal Board thereafter issued a notice for the demolition of the constructions treating them to be unauthorised; whereupon the petitioner instituted a civil suit for injunction to restrain the Municipal Board from stopping him from making the constructions. The suit was decreed by the Munsif, but the District Judge set aside the decree on the ground that the suit was barred by Section 321 of the U.P. Municipalities Act. The petitioner preferred a Second Appeal before the High Court which has since been allowed and the decree passed by the Munsif has been confirmed. It was during the pendency of the Second Appeal that on 18-12-1961 the Prescribed Authority, who was also the Mukhya Nagar Adhikari of the Nagar Mahapalika of Kanpur, gave the notice under Section 10 of the Act for the demolition of one verandah and two big rooms on the first floor and chhajjas at the first and second floor levels projecting over the covered Nala. 3. The notice is mainly challenged on the ground that the building being constructed was one and once the constructions had started before the commencement of the Act, it could be completed without obtaining a fresh sanction from the Prescribed Authority. The answer to this question shall depend upon the meaning of the term "building", though, of course, wherever the Act is silent, an equitable view shall have to be adopted. 4. The Act, came into force on October 6, 1958, and Kanpur was declared a Regulated Area on December 10, 1958. The answer to this question shall depend upon the meaning of the term "building", though, of course, wherever the Act is silent, an equitable view shall have to be adopted. 4. The Act, came into force on October 6, 1958, and Kanpur was declared a Regulated Area on December 10, 1958. U.P. (Regulation of Building Operations) Regulations, 1960 and U.P. (Regulation of Building Operations) Directions, 1960 came into force on August 1, 1960. Wherever necessary they shall be referred as Regulations and Directions, respectively. 5. It has not come on record when the construction of the front rooms on the first floor is taken up. In para. 4 of the counter-affidavit it is simply alleged that on 13-11-1961 the Building Inspector of the Nagar Mahapalika reported to the Area Officer, Zone III, that the petitioner had ,tarted unauthorised constructions in premises No. 4072 and that he was then constructing a room on the first floor towards he west. The frontage of the building is more or less towards the north, and hence for purposes of this writ petition we shall have to proceed with the assumption that the front rooms on the first floor had been constructed before the Act came into force and that the Nagar Mahapalika raised an abjection when a room in the rear on the first floor was being constructed. In the circumstances, it is not necessary to express an opinion whether a person could, without the permission of the Prescribed Authority, make constructions before the Directions and Regulations came into force. 6. The important point for consideration is whether all the three storeys of the building shall be treated as one building or a part thereof can be deemed to be a building as defined in the Act. If a part of the building can be treated as building, it shall have to be seen whether for determination of this question we must consider a particular storey as a whole or, a room on any floor can be regarded as such. 7. Sec. 6 of the Act prohibits the erection of a building without the previous permission of i he Prescribed Authority in writing. 7. Sec. 6 of the Act prohibits the erection of a building without the previous permission of i he Prescribed Authority in writing. The term "to erect" in relation to a building means the construction of a building for the first time or the reconstruction of a building according to fresh or revised plan after demolition of the existing building vide Section 2 (h) of the Act. The term "building.' is defined in clause (b) of Section 2 of the Act to mean "any structure or erection or part of a structure or erection which is intended to be used for residential, commercial, industrial or other purposes, whether in actual use or not." A part of the building shall thus come within this definition. Even on general principles a part of the structure or erection must be deemed to be one for which prior permission of the Prescribed Authority is necessary. A person may make a building double storeyed and for the upper floor he must obtain the permission of the Prescribed Authority, otherwise the very purpose of the Act shall be frustrated. 8. Whether the storey as a whole or the rooms individually be treated as "building" shall depend upon the object of the enactment. The Act was made to provide for the regulation of building operations with a view to prevent haphazard development of urban and rural areas. The preamble suggests that the control is on the location of the building, and not the accommodation therein. This also becomes evident from Section 5 of the Act, which gives power to the Controlling Authority to issue directions not inconsistent with any general directions that may be issued by the State Government in this respect. Most of the clauses of Section 5 apply to the division of the site into plots and the raising of the constructions so that there may be sufficient open space left with roads etc. for general use. Clause (f) thereof, however, enables the Controlling Authority to issue directions to ensure that there is proper frontage of the building. Most of the clauses of Section 5 apply to the division of the site into plots and the raising of the constructions so that there may be sufficient open space left with roads etc. for general use. Clause (f) thereof, however, enables the Controlling Authority to issue directions to ensure that there is proper frontage of the building. Where a new building is to be constructed after the commencement of the Act, prior permission of the Prescribed Authority is necessary on all the points, specially, the location of the building; but where the ground floor and a part of the first floor has been constructed before the commencement of the Act, any direction issued by the Controlling Authority with, regard to the location of the building cannot be complied with, all the more, when there is no provision in the Act empowering the Prescribed Authority to order demolition of the existing constructions which do not conform with the Directions and Regulations. 9. When the ground floor of the building already constructed cannot be demolished, permission, if any, shall be necessary for the further constructions to be made over the already constructed ground floor. In this view of the matter clauses (a) to (c) , (e) and (g) shall be inapplicable. Clause (d) consists of two parts. The whole of the clause is as below : "the erection of buildings on any site and the restrictions and conditions in regard to the open spaces to be maintained in or around buildings and the height and character of buildings. Once the ground floor has been constructed any direction given on all the points covered by the clause except the height of buildings cannot be complied with. Clause (f) covers directions regarding "the architectural features of the elevation or frontage of any building to be erected on any site." 10. Clauses (g) to (k) of Section 5 can be of no assistance in deciding the above question. Clause (1) is based on the general object as contained in the preamble. Under this clause such directions as may be necessary can be given for the proper planning of any regulated area and for preventing buildings being erected haphazardly in such area. 11. Clause (1) is based on the general object as contained in the preamble. Under this clause such directions as may be necessary can be given for the proper planning of any regulated area and for preventing buildings being erected haphazardly in such area. 11. In cases where the first floor of the building was under construction on the date of the commencement of the Act, directions with regard to the first floor can be given only if the front rooms thereof have not been constructed. Directions which can be given would be regarding the height, the architectural features of the elevation and the frontage. Once the front rooms are ready, there can be no substantial change in the height and in the architectural features of the elevation and also in frontage. 12. When the directions of the Controlling Authority can have no effect in completing the constructions on the first floor, it can be laid down that for completing such constructions, no fresh permission of the Prescribed Authority is necessary. In other words, broadly speaking, without laying down any rigid and inflexible rule, it can be said that for purposes of the Act each storey of the building shall be treats as a separate 'building' and permission o the Prescribed Authority shall be necessary if no constructions on that storey have been made. Similarly, it would be necessary to obtain the permission of the Prescribed Authority if no substantial construction has been made on a particular store; which shall have the effect of determining what the height of the rooms shall be am what shall be the frontage. 13. There is nothing new in Section 10 of the Act under which the Prescribed Authority can order demolition of unauthorised constructions. Action under this section car be taken where the erection of a building has been commenced or is being carried on or has been completed in contravention of any direction issued under the Act or with out the permission referred to in Section 6 or in contravention of any condition subject to which such permission has beer granted. There shall be contravention of a direction issued under the Act only prior permission of the Prescribed Authority is necessary. There shall be contravention of a direction issued under the Act only prior permission of the Prescribed Authority is necessary. Further, where the constructions already made cannot be demolished, even though not in conformity with the directions issued under the Act, there can be no demolition of such constructions, and hence to complete the construction:, in the building cannot be regarded to be illegal or irregular. 14. At this place it may further be observed that where the law is silent as to how partly constructed buildings are to be completed, the Courts of law must take a reasonable and equitable view. It cannot be expected that the owners would leave the constructions incomplete. They have to complete the constructions without the demolition of the constructions already made at the time the Act came into force. When the height of the other rooms call not be varied and it must be the same as of the rooms already constructed, it is but necessary that the owner be in a position to construct the other rooms with the same height, even though this may be in contravention of the directions issued under the Act. The Prescribed Authority has no power to approve a plan in contravention of the directions and if for completing the constructions Courts of law insist on the rant of permission by the Prescribed authority, in effect no permission shall be ranted and the owner would be put to an reparable injury. If under the Act the 'prescribed Authority was permitted to apart from the directions in exceptional circumstances, the Courts of law could hold hat even for completing the constructions n a particular floor, permission of the 'prescribed Authority was necessary. 15. I am thus of opinion that in the in that case the first floor of the building was could be treated as a 'building' for the purposes of the Act and that the second floor shall be another building distinct from the ground floor and the first floor further, when the front rooms had already been constructed, the directions issued under the Act could not govern the completion of this part of the building and fence the constructions on the first floor could be completed without the permission if the Prescribed Authority. The impugn-d notice is for the demolition of the verandah and the bath room on the first floor lid the chhajja on the first and second floors. In this proceeding we are not considering the question of demolition of the chhajja on the second floor as this was not mentioned in the show cause notice, Annexure I. Whether the chhajja on the Second floor can or cannot be demolished hall be considered if raised in connection VITH the second floor. The notice is thus invalid and deserves to be quashed. 16. The writ petition is hereby allowed Ind the impugned notice, Annexure IV, is quashed, 'Costs easy. Stay Order is vacated.