Page No.# 1/11 GAHC030002602025 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : I.A.(Civil)/71/2025 Dr. J. Lalramchhuanga C-14/C, Ramhlun North, Aizawl. VERSUS Re. INTACH, r/b Mr. Rin Sanga, Convener of INTACH and 24 Ors. Zarkawt, Aizawl, Mizoram. Advocate for the Petitioner : Mr A.R. Malhotra Advocate for the Respondent : Linked Case : PIL(Suo Moto)/2/2024 Re. INTACH r/b Mr. Rin Sanga Convener of INTACH Zarkawt Aizawl Mizoram VERSUS The State of Mizoram r/b the Chief Secretary and 24 Ors. Aizawl Mizoram 2:The Secretary to the Govt. of Mizoram Land Revenue and Settlement Dept. Page No.# 2/11 Aizawl Mizoram 3:The Secretary to the Govt. of Mizoram UDandPA Aizawl Mizoram 4:The Secretary to the Govt. of Mizoram Home Dept. Aizawl Mizoram 5:The Deputy Commissioner Aizawl District Aizawl Mizoram 6:The Superintendent of Police Aizawl District Aizawl Mizoram 7:The Aizawl Municipal Corporation r/b the Municipal Commissioner Ch. Chhunga Bus Terminal Building Thuampui Veng Aizawl 8:The Secretary to the Govt. of Mizoram Commerce and Industries Dept. Aizawl Mizoram 9:Dr. J. Lalramchhuanga C -14/C Ramhlun North Aizawl. 10:Lalmuanpuia B-10/2 Bawngkawn. 11:K.C Lalawmawia CNB D-34/A Chaltlang. 12:Lalchhandami N 4/21 Page No.# 3/11 Bawngkawn. 13:Lalremsiama S/o Kawlthankunga R/o M-73/1 Ramhlun South Aizawl Ph. 9485358539. 14:Zohmingliani W/o Peter V.L. Duha (L) R/o G-50 Chanmari Aizawl Ph. 8259909066. 15:Lalliana S/o Suahzachin (L) R/o N5-47 Bawngkawn Aizawl Ph. 9856708011. 16:Lalramsanga S/o Lawmzuala (L) R/o N5-51 Bawngkawn Aizawl Ph. 9774610759. 17:Liantluanga Kawlni S/o Lalsawia (L) R/o Ramhlun North Aizawl Ph. 7005605960. 18:J. Zokailiana S/o Singthanliana (L) R/o N 5-44 Bawngkawn Aizawl Ph. 9862808981. Page No.# 4/11 19:Lalmuanpuii D/o Tlanglawma (L) R/o T-2 Zuangtui Aizawl Ph. 7627997414. 20:Lalhmangaihzuali w/o T. Lalchhuanmawia R/o PHE Pump House Quarter Bawngkawn Aizawl Ph. 8794015790. 21:C. Rothangi W/o R. Tlanghmingthanga (L) R/o N5-46 Bawngkawn Aizawl Ph. 8415009435. 22:Lalthanpuia H/o Dr. M.S. Dawngliani R/o N5-33A Bawngkawn Aizawl Ph. 7005977364. 23:Ms. H. Zodinsangi D/o Kapthianga (L) R/o Zotlang Aizawl. 24:Sh. Lalhruaisanga S/o Phundinga (L) R/o Chawntlangpui Lawngtlai District 25:Ms. Hmingthanzuali D/o Lungmuana R/o H. No. A-1(A)/5 Chaltlang. Advocate for the Petitioner : Mr. Joseph Lalchhanhima Renthlei (Amicus Curiae) Page No.# 5/11 Advocate for the Respondent : Addl. AG/GA Mizoram For R.1-6 &8 BEFORE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE MICHAEL ZOTHANKHUMA HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE NELSON SAILO ORDER 27.03.2026 (Michael Zothankhuma, J) Heard Mr. A.R. Malhotra, learned counsel for the applicant/respondent No. 9 in the PIL. 2. This is an application praying for allowing the applicant/respondent No. 9 to construct his house on the basis of the permission given by the AMC. 3. Mr. A.R. Malhotra, learned counsel for the applicant/respondent No. 9 submits that the AMC has given approval to the building plans of the applicant, for construction of a G+7 building between two buildings, which are standing on either side of the applicant’s land. 4. Mr. Joseph L. Renthlei, learned Amicus Curiae for the applicant in the PIL, on the other hand submits that a stay order had been issued by this Court on 18.07.2024, prohibiting any construction and stopping any on-going construction activity that had not completed one floor in the Bawngkawn to Durtlang (Leitan) Page No.# 6/11 Road. He submits that the order passed in this application would also have a bearing on the persons, who are attempting to construct buildings on the said road. He submits that in fact, there are 3 respondents, who are respondent Nos. 13, 15 & 16, besides the respondent No. 9, who would be effected by the order passed today. He accordingly submits that the entire matter should be heard and disposed of. He submits that deciding the present application would amount to deciding the PIL in a piecemeal manner. 5. Mr. A.R. Malhotra, learned counsel for the applicant/respondent No. 9 submits that after consulting with his applicant, he has been instructed to say that the applicant will not construct beyond G + 6 floors. 6. We have heard the learned counsels for the parties. 7. This PIL has been initiated due to numerous landslides having occurred on the Bawngkawn - Durtlang (Leitan) road, due to indiscriminate earth cutting of the steep cliffs, along the side of the road. This had effected thousands of people in Durtlang and Aizawl during the entire monsoon season, 2024. Accordingly, while taking up the matter on 18.07.2024, this Court had issued a stay order in paragraph No. 12 of the order dated 18.07.2024 which is as follows:- “12. On considering all the above facts, this Court directs that no new construction activity shall henceforth be allowed on either side of the Bawngkawn - Durtlang (Leitan) road. Further, any construction activity that has started but where the construction activity has not surpassed/completed one floor of the said construction of any building, the same shall be stopped immediately. Any construction activity in relation to the petrol pump to be built on Page No.# 7/11 the side of the said road should be stopped immediately.” 8. Subsequent to the stay order dated 18.07.2024, the AMC had issued order dated 19.07.2024 to the following effect:- “No. 18015/10/2024-AMC (Estab) Dated Aizawl, the 19th July, 2024 ORDER With reference to The Gauhati High Court Case No. PIL (Suo Moto)/2/2024, Order dated 18.07.2024. the Aizawl Municipal Corporation issues the following directives: 1. No new construction activity shall be permitted on the side of the Bawngkawn. Durtlang (Leitan) road henceforth. 2. Any ongoing construction activity on this road, where the construction has not reached or surpassed the completion of one floor, shall be halted immediately. 3. Construction related to the proposed petrol pump on the side of the aicrementioned road shall also be stopped immediately. The above direction will however not be applicable to construction activity that is being undertaken for the purpose of stoppage of any future landslides, like retaining wall etc. This order is issued in compliance with the court's directives and aims to ensure adherence to legal and regulatory standards. (K. LALHMINGLIANA) Municipal Commissioner Aizawl Municipal Corporation” 9. Thereafter, affidavits were filed by various authorities, individuals and the applicant. This Court thereafter passed order dated 22.10.2025, on being informed by the learned Amicus Curiae that numerous constructions had been made along with the road in violation of the order dated 18.07.2024. Page No.# 8/11 Accordingly, this Court had directed the AMC, the respondent No. 6 and the representative of the applicant to make a spot verification with regard to the said information brought to the notice of the Court. 10. Subsequent to the above the order dated 22.10.2024, a joint inspection was carried out on and the report of the joint inspection team, which is at page No. 6 of the AMC affidavit in I.A No. 71/2025, is to the effect that the following 6 persons have violated the order of this Court dated 18.07.2024. The name of the 6 persons, mentioned in the joint inspection report are as follows:- “(i). Dr. Vanlalhruaii h/o Rorelkima, Ramhlun Venglai, Ph. 8416045004 - RCC Building (Annexure-5) (ii). Lalremsiama S/o Kawithankunga, M-73/1, Ramhlun 'S'. Ph. 9485358539.-RCC Building (Annexure-6) (iii). Lalliana S/o Suahzachin (L), N5-47, Bawngkawn. Ph. 9856708011 - RCC Building (Annexure-7) (iv). Lalramsanga S/o Lawmzuala (L). N5-51. Bawngkawn. Ph. 9774610759- Assam-type Building (Annexure-8) (v). Lallawmzuali, Bawngkawn Shalom Vengthar, Ph. 8414884739 - Assam-type Building (Annexure-9) (vi). Lalramthanga, Prop. Buhril Enterprise - Assam-type Building (Annexure-10)”. 11. Considering the fact that the above noted 6 persons have violated the Court’s order dated 18.07.2024, we are of the view that a Contempt Case should be registered against the 6 persons. Accordingly, Registry is directed to register a Contempt Case against the above noted 6 persons, by making the petitioner Page No.# 9/11 in the present case the petitioner in the Contempt Case also. The Contempt Case should be listed on 01.04.2026. 12. It is interesting to note that the regulations that are followed by the AMC while giving permission/permits/approval to construct buildings within the Aizawl city area, does not have any restrictions with regard to the number of floors that can be constructed. We do not find the same to be reasonable, keeping in view the topography of Aizawl city, while some parts of the city may have level land, other parts of the city have very steep cliffs. As such, the civic amenities to be provided by the AMC and the various Departments to a building would vary, depending upon the locality. Further when 5, 6, 7 & 8 storied houses are constructed, some of the floors are usually let out on rent and that puts a strain on the civic amenities/facilities to be provided to the said building by various authorities. In the red/clay/sandy soil of Mizoram, it is not practical to have very tall high rises along steep cliff, besides the fact that the whole of the State is within the highest earthquake prone zone in India. 13. Mr. Zoramchhana, the learned counsel for the AMC submits that the approved height limit of a building in Aizawl, as per the AMC Building Regulation, 2012, is 19 metres, which is approximately 64.4 ft. He accordingly submits that no building can be constructed beyond 64.4 ft. Page No.# 10/11 14. The proposed construction does not lie inside the protected area of the Bawngkawn – Durtlang (Leitan) road and the applicants proposed building is to be constructed between two already constructed buildings, besides keeping in view the undertaking given by the applicant through Mr. A.R. Malhotra, learned counsel, that the building would not be constructed beyond G + 6 floors or 64.4 ft, we allow the applicant to construct a G + 6 floor building. However, the total height of the building should not be beyond be 64.4 ft. It is also made clear that the total height of 64.4 ft. would also include any temporary shed/house, which is wooden, tile etc., constructed on the terrace. 15. In the event, the constructed building is unintentionally or intentionally beyond 64.4 ft, the extended portion of the building shall be demolished by the applicant. If the same is not demolished by the applicant, the same shall be demolished by the AMC and the cost of the same shall be realized from the applicant. 16 It is also been brought to our notice that Mr. Lalremsiama, Mr. Lalliana and Mr. Lalramsanga are respondent Nos. 13, 15 & 16 in the PIL respectively. Dr. Vanlalhruaii, Ms. Lallawmzuali and Mr. Lalramthanga are not party respondents in the PIL. We are thus of the view that the above 3 persons should also be impleaded in the PIL. Registry to implead Dr. Vanlalhruaii, Ms. Lallawmzuali and Page No.# 11/11 Mr. Lalramthanga, who are mentioned in the Joint Inspection report as respondent Nos. 26, 27 & 28 respectively in PIL. The corrected copy of the cause title should be prepared by the Registry and inserted in the main PIL. 17. We also direct the AMC to conduct a study and see if the maximum height of a building should be reduced below 19 metres in some areas of Aizawl city and give a report of the same in the main PIL. 18. I.A is accordingly disposed of. JUDGE JUDGE Comparing Assistant