Majemin Shafie Mohideen and his mother, Sharifah Othman, filed for leave to initiate judicial review proceedings at the High Court here earlier this month.
They claim that MBPP had failed to serve them a mandatory notice under Section 21(6) of the Town and Country Planning Act 1976, denying them the right to object to the project.
They said such a notice is meant to inform neighbouring landowners of a proposed development and allow them to raise objections or concerns before approval is given.
The dispute centres on an eight-unit, three-storey shophouse development on Jalan Kampung Relau in Bayan Lepas, being built adjacent to the applicants’ home.
According to the court papers, the applicants claim they only became aware of the development after construction was already under way, despite being immediate neighbours whose property rights would be directly affected.
Majemin and Sharifah are also challenging MBPP’s claim that the project complies with planning rules, particularly the requirement for a minimum 10ft setback between the commercial building and nearby residential properties.
They claim that no such setback exists and that the council’s reliance on an open space within their own land as a “setback” is legally unsustainable.
They say this has affected the ventilation, safety and enjoyment of their property.
In their court filing, they also contend that the absence of objections cannot be used to legitimise what they describe as a failure to comply with statutory planning requirements.
They are also challenging a media statement issued by MBPP on Dec 3 defending the project and accusing an activist of spreading misinformation.
Majemin and Sharifah said the statement was misleading and factually inaccurate, and issued without proper verification.
They are seeking a court order to declare that the planning approval process was illegal, compel MBPP to rectify the alleged breaches, and quash the Dec 3 media statement by the council.
Majemin and Sharifah further argue that MBPP’s actions infringed their constitutional right to property under Article 13 of the Federal Constitution.
Court documents show the planning application was submitted in 2016, approved in 2017, and granted building approval in 2021. Construction began shortly after that.
MBPP had previously said that proper notice was issued, planning approvals were valid, and that any unauthorised structures were built by the property owners themselves.
The council also said it had lodged reports with the police and the Malaysian Communications and Multimedia Commission over a viral social media video related to the issue.
Majemin has since filed a police report disputing MBPP’s claims, insisting the land in question is legally his, and that no enforcement action was ever taken against him before the council’s public statement.
The case is set for case management on Jan 7 before deputy registrar Siti Noorhidayah Noor.
FMT has reached out to MBPP for comment and has yet to get a response. At the time of writing, the city council has yet to file its statement of defence.