JUDGMENT : B.P. Dharmadhikari, J News item about construction of 4 storied building collapse in Civil Lines locality of Nagpur published in “The Hitwada” dated 19.12.2006 and other newspapers, led to suo moto cognizance by this Court in public interest and thereafter Writ Petition No. 6541/2006 came to be registered. Advocate Shri Firdos Mirza, came to be appointed as Amicus and after conducting inquiry with the office of respondent no.2 Nagpur Municipal Corporation i.e. Planning Authority and after paying visit to the spot, he drafted this petition. 2. Learned Amicus has made certain prayers like directing respondent no.2 to ascertain damage caused to the neighbouring owners because of collapse of newly constructed building, holding of inquiry against the officers of Nagpur Municipal Corporation. Other prayer is to direct the Nagpur Municipal Corporation to update format of its building permit. It is further requested that necessary police action also be initiated. 3. Respondent no.3 Nagpur Improvement Trust has filed reply and pointed out certain provisions in Development Control Rules (DCR). It is further stated that the Nagpur Improvement Trust has decided to obtain additional information or undertaking regarding safety of building before according sanction from the Architect/Engineer and Structural Engineer/Supervisor of the project. Attention is invited to Clauses 6.2 to 6.4 of the Development Control Rules for said purpose. Rule 6.2.9 is also relied upon. 4. We do not wish to delve more on the provisions of DCR, which have come into force in the year 2000. Compliance with those provisions might have avoided the accident. 5. Learned Amicus however, has pointed out that a plot not in existence has been created and was made available for raising the structure of which collapsed. The piece of land situated by the side of a flowing nala was permitted to be constructed upon and for that purpose, the then Additional Municipal Commissioner or Municipal Commissioner of respondent no.2 exercised some powers. He has pointed out that statutorily from said nala, 9 meters of land should have been left open and thereafter the outer boundary of plot could have started. Thus, after that boundary, again a marginal space ought to have been left open, and then the structure i.e. the building line would have come out. He has pointed out that statutorily from said nala, 9 meters of land should have been left open and thereafter the outer boundary of plot could have started. Thus, after that boundary, again a marginal space ought to have been left open, and then the structure i.e. the building line would have come out. From his arguments, it is apparent that in the present matter, this requirement was not followed and on the contrary 9 meters distance was brought down to 3 meters. If above mentioned requirements were followed, the viable plot was not available at that site. That is the note of the competent building engineer on the file of respondent no.2. Inspite of that note, the Municipal Authorities brought down the requirement to 3 meters and effort was made to create a viable plot. 6. Learned Amicus has on the basis of instructions gathered from the technical expert has urged that the building being in the bed of nala, was having tendency to accumulate water. It was also black soil, with the result, 4 storied construction came down within a year of its completion. He is pointing out other violations i.e. absence of a commencement certificate or a completion certificate. 7. Facts at hand prima facie show that without their being proper certificate of a structural engineer to support such a building, the construction was going on. 8. It is not in dispute that even today the so called plot is lying as it is i.e. without any construction. The neighbours whose residential house were damaged to certain extent due to collapse, have already repaired their respective houses. 9. As cognizance has been taken in public interest, after noticing the affidavit of Nagpur Improvement Trust, and the state of affairs, we find it appropriate to direct the respondents to insist for displaying a board on such site at a prominent place where the construction work sanctioned by the competent planning authority is to commence. The board shall display name of the structural engineer, name of Civil engineer and contractor as also name of Architect and their phone numbers. The note that sanctioned plan number with date thereof and that its copy is available for perusal at the site, shall also be displayed on such board. The planning authorities should issue commencement certificate only after satisfying themselves that such a board is displayed. The note that sanctioned plan number with date thereof and that its copy is available for perusal at the site, shall also be displayed on such board. The planning authorities should issue commencement certificate only after satisfying themselves that such a board is displayed. The date and particulars of commencement certificate shall also thereafter be added on such board. 10. In present matter, as we find that the power to relax, has been exercised prima facie erroneously, we direct respondent nos. 1 and 2 to enquire into the matter. For that purpose, they can issue suitable notice to the concerned Additional Municipal Commissioner or Municipal Commissioner as the case may be. We are aware that these officers are not parties before us and hence, our above observations shall not be binding and shall not affect or prejudice defence available to them in any manner. 11. This action shall be initiated within a period of six weeks from today and the present incumbent (Municipal Commissioner) shall file an affidavit in this Writ Petition, though it is disposed of, to that effect after its copy is served on the learned Amicus. 12. If learned Amicus is not served with such copy within a period of six weeks, it will be open to him to bring this fact to the notice of this Court. 13. With these directions and observation, and placing on record our special thanks to the learned Amicus as also other respective counsel who have assisted the Court in this matter, we dispose of the present proceedings.