Table of Contents
Illegal construction RTI — plan, notices, paper trail
Quick Reply: When an unauthorised structure rises next door and complaints change nothing, RTI to the municipal body's Building Department PIO fetches the three papers that matter: the sanctioned plan, the occupancy or completion certificate status, and the file on your own complaint — notices issued, notings made, action pending. ₹10 starts it, 30 days answers it, and the reply becomes evidence for everything that follows.
Target PIO: the municipal body's building / town planning department
The three asks: sanctioned plan; occupancy or completion status; your complaint's file
Fee: ₹10 — the state schedule
Clock: 30 days, then first appeal in 30, second appeal in 90
Parallel track: writ to the High Court for chronic inaction
Unauthorised construction survives on one thing: nobody putting the municipality's own paper on the table. A sanction file either exists or it does not; an occupancy certificate was either issued or it was not; a complaint was either acted on or parked. Each of those is a record, each record is reachable by RTI, and each reply is signed by an officer. That is why the RTI precedes the courtroom.
Why this RTI works
- Sanctioned plans are public records — a building permission is granted under a municipal building bylaw, and the file — drawings, conditions, deviations noted — belongs to the authority
- Occupancy and completion certificates are granted or refused in writing; the status of the application is a fact the authority must state
- Your complaint's file — every complaint to a municipal body creates a file: receipt, inspection note, engineer's remark, notice issued or deferred. Asking for the file converts silence into a documented default
- The reply binds — a PIO's written statement that no sanction exists, or that no notice was issued, is evidence in every later forum
The template — copy and file
To: The Public Information Officer, [Municipal Corporation / Council / Development Authority], [City] Subject: Application under Section 6, RTI Act, 2005 Sir/Madam, kindly provide: 1. A copy of the sanctioned building plan and permission for the property at [full address], permission no. ___ if available, or confirmation that no building permission exists for the structure. 2. The status of the occupancy certificate / completion certificate application for the said property. 3. The file on complaint no. ___ dated ___ regarding unauthorised construction at the said property: inspection notes, the officer deputed, and copies of any notices issued under the municipal building bylaws. 4. The action taken on the notices referred to above, with dates. 5. The name and designation of the officer responsible for building rule enforcement in the ward. Fee of Rs 10 enclosed [IPO / as per the state schedule]. Yours faithfully, [Name, address, phone, email]
Address it to the body that sanctioned or should have sanctioned the work — corporation, council, development authority, or the panchayat for village sites. The wrong address costs two weeks in a Section 6(3) transfer.
After the reply
- No sanction exists — the reply itself anchors the demolition-or-regularisation case; take it to the ward office, the Municipal Commissioner's grievance cell, and if nothing moves, the High Court
- A notice exists but was never enforced — ask for the enforcement file by a second RTI; unexecuted notices are the classic municipal failure
- Deviation beyond the sanctioned plan — the comparison between sanction drawing and the built structure is for the court's commissioner, not the PIO; the RTI supplies the drawing
- The 30-day clock — no reply or a refusal, and the first appeal follows within 30 days; the second appeal to the State Information Commission within 90 of the FAA's order
Common mistakes
- Omitting the full property identifier — door number, plot or survey number, ward. A PIO who cannot locate the property cannot answer
- Asking the municipality to stop the construction — RTI fetches records; the stopping is a complaint, a writ, or both, fed by the records
- Filing one omnibus RTI for the whole neighbourhood — one property, one application, clean replies
- Forgetting the complaint number — the strongest ask on the list is the file on your own registered complaint
Case law that anchors the route
- Olga Tellis v. Bombay Municipal Corporation (Supreme Court, 1985) — even where demolition power exists, due process governs its exercise; procedure is not the obstacle to enforcement, it is the guarantee
- CBSE v. Aditya Bandopadhyay (Supreme Court, 2011) — public records held by public authorities are information; exemptions are the exception, not the default
Frequently asked questions
Can I get my neighbour's sanctioned plan?
Yes — building permissions are public records held by the authority, and third parties obtain them routinely. Personal privacy under Section 8(1)(j) does not cover a building sanction.
The builder says the plan is approved. How do I check?
Ask for the copy of the sanctioned plan and the permission number. If it exists, the PIO supplies it; if it does not, the PIO says so in writing.
The municipality demolished nothing for a year. Now what?
Take the RTI replies — no notice, or unexecuted notice — to the High Court in a writ for enforcement. Chronic inaction with the paper trail attached is exactly what writs are for.
Can RTI stop the construction?
Not by itself. It produces the records that the complaint, the notice-appeal and the writ then act on.
Related reading
Primary sources
- Right to Information Act, 2005 — Sections 6, 7, 19
- Olga Tellis v. Bombay Municipal Corporation, (1985) 3 SCC 545
- CBSE v. Aditya Bandopadhyay, (2011) 8 SCC 497
Last reviewed: 26 August 2026. The statutory and judgment anchors were re-verified; an unverifiable 2021 Bombay High Court citation carried by the old page has been removed.