1. This appeal has been directed against the order of respondent dated 09-09-11, by virtue of which the respondent has passed order for demolition of construction raised by appellant at Jain Colony, Jammu. 2. Appellant has challenged the impugned order on the ground that appellant being President of Jain Ranaik Parivar is competent to file appeal. 3. That by virtue of sale deed, registered on 29-04-1999 by Sub-Registrar, Jammu land was purchased, which comprises of kitchen rooms toilet extra. That thereafter biradari raised construction of ground floor for the purpose of Jain temple. 4. That in order to avoid problem in future biradari moved an application for permission to respondent for raising construction which was granted vide by order No: 300/BS/11 dated:10-06-11. That in terms of permission construction was raised at first floor. That one two family of biradari, raised fingers about this construction and made complaint to the authorities. That ground floor was already in existence and first floor has been raised after permission. That no show cause, notice was properly served upon the appellant. That appellant has not committed any violation and construction has been raised particular for community who are doing religious job for kul-mata. That order has been passed in violation of Act. 5. Notice of this appeal was issued and served upon the respondent. Respondent appeared and filed the objections along with records. Respondent in his objection at Para no. 4 has reported the violations. 6. Para-4. That the appellant has not maintained the proper setbacks as per permission and thus has committed major violation of Master Plan. The appellant has violated the provision of J&K Control of Building Operation Act, 1988 and J&K Control of Building Operations Regulation, 1998. The appellant has made following violations. There are: S.No. Permission as per Master Plan As per site Qtm. Of violation 1. Plot area In Sft In %age 2. Coverage a)Ground floor Existing Existing b)First floor 925 Sft. 2052 Sft. 1127 Sft 76.40% 3. Front set back 14'-0" 14'-8" Nil Nil b)Rear set back 6'-3" 5'-0" for 20'-0" Nil for 20'-0" 1'-3" for 20'-0" 6'-3" for 20'-0" 20% for 50% 100% for 50% C)Side set back 6'-8 5"-9"for 53'-0" Nil for 7'-0" 11" for 53 " 6-8' for 7'-0" 13.7% for 88% 100% or 12% Other side Nil Nil nil nil 4. Front set back 14'-0" 14'-8" Nil Nil b)Rear set back 6'-3" 5'-0" for 20'-0" Nil for 20'-0" 1'-3" for 20'-0" 6'-3" for 20'-0" 20% for 50% 100% for 50% C)Side set back 6'-8 5"-9"for 53'-0" Nil for 7'-0" 11" for 53 " 6-8' for 7'-0" 13.7% for 88% 100% or 12% Other side Nil Nil nil nil 4. a)Land Use Religious Under construction b)Height 25'-0" 27'-10 2'-10" 11.32% That total violations are as under; a) Violation at ground floor = 1127 sft. Total Violation = 1127 sft. 5. Title of land has been proved, because photo copy of registered sale deed dt 29.4.1999, reveals that, appellant has purchased land measuring 2400sqft. Situated at jain coloney talab tillo jammu,over which construction has been raised. 6. Now next question arises, as to whether construction or Khailfwarzi is minor or major in nature. 7. Rules 10 and 11 of COBO. REULATIONS are necessary for deciding the matter. These reads as under:- 10. Appeals--(1) An appeal against the order of the Authority made under section 5 and 7 of the Act shall lie before the Chairman of the J&K Special Tribunal or such other Member of the said Tribunal as may be decided by the same Chairman. 11. (1) The Appellate Authority may compound an offence of a minor nature specified in sub clause (2) of these Regulations; Provided that the compounding fee shall be worked out on the basis of rates to be notified by the Government. (2) For the purpose of these Regulations an offence of a minor nature shall include any erection or re-erection of the b building which has taken place in violation of permission referred in section 4 of the Act or deemed permission as referred in Sub-clause (2) of clause (7) of these Regulations provided that such erection or re-erection: (i) does not violate the approved land use of area as notified in the Master Plan or Town Planning Scheme; (ii) does not violate the permissible front, rear or side set backs prescribed in the bye laws: (iii) does not violate by more than 10% the permissible grounds coverage a prescribed in the bye laws: and (iv) does not violate the permissible height of the building as prescribed in the bye laws. 8. Bare perusal of these regulations, it is evident that, this Court can compound construction /Khailfwarzi of minor in nature. 8. Bare perusal of these regulations, it is evident that, this Court can compound construction /Khailfwarzi of minor in nature. For the purpose of offence of minor in nature with regard to construction, so raised in violation section- 4 COBO Act, means that construction, shall not violate the approved land use of area as notified in Master plan or Town planning Scheme, secondly it does not violate permissible front rear or side set back prescribed in bye-laws and thirdly it does not violate more than 10% permissible ground coverage as prescribed in the bye-laws and lastly does not violate permissible height of building as prescribed in bye-laws. 9. In present case appellant has been permitted to raise construction on first floor by Municipal authority for 925 sqft. with 14ft. front set bask, 6.8 ft. sides set back,6.3 sft rear set back and 25 ft. height. 10. As per report land use in area is religious, so there is no violation with regard to first regulation. 11. As per report, there is no violation with regard to front set back. There are violations with regard to rear and side set back amounting to 20% and 13.7 %. But at page 96 of master plan of Jammu 2021, reveals that no side set back are required with regard to land measuring 1077-2690 sqft. 12. Generally set back are required to be kept on ground floor and these are not necessary for first floor and thereon, unless a grave violation has been performed. Further ground coverage is also not applicable to first floor. 13. As per report, appellant has maintained height of building as 27-10 ft. instead of 25 ft., which appellant was permitted in term of permission. I have also gone through master plan Jammu 2021. At page 96 a table has been shown, which prescribe Maximum height to be maintained in plotting house. As per this table maximum height has been mentioned as 12 meters, which comes to about 40 fts. Approximately. 14. In the present case, construction has already been completed; authorities of the respondent have remained mum till the construction is completed. Had authorities been so honest and vigilant, the construction would have been stopped at very initial stage.. As per this table maximum height has been mentioned as 12 meters, which comes to about 40 fts. Approximately. 14. In the present case, construction has already been completed; authorities of the respondent have remained mum till the construction is completed. Had authorities been so honest and vigilant, the construction would have been stopped at very initial stage.. In case at this stage, excess violation in term of regulations 11 of act, is allowed to be demolished, it will not be an individual but public at large especially devotees and persons who are coming for worship shall suffer. At present law of equity demands that construction should not be demolished. 15. Further in case titled Kewal Krishan v. J&K Special Tribunal AIR 2005 SC 2578 : 2004 (2) JKJ HC-443 (DB), the Apex Court has held at Para no.16 held that, it is unnecessary permitting demolition of the structure even if it be in contravention of the Act. or zoning provision. 16. Therefore, keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case, the appeal of the appellant is allowed. Violations/ Khailfwarzi, as reported by the respondent are compounded. Appellant is directed to pay Rs. 30/- per sft. as compounding fee for an area of 1127 sft. to the respondent, within a period of 2 months from today. After deposit of compounding fees, construction shall be deemed to be regularized. In case fees is not deposited as per this order, than respondent may proceed under law against appellant. Record along with copy of order be sent back. The file of this court be consigned to record after due completion.