The planning authority yesterday agreed to Patrick Dalli’s request to postpone the hearing on his application to sanction infringements on a farmhouse because he was “indisposed”.

The Mepa board said the request to postpone the hearing would still be met even though members “had no problem deciding on the case today”.

It is not unusual for such cases to be decided even if the architect or the applicant are not present.

The planning authority was yesterday expected to decide whether to approve Mr Dalli’s request to sanction his development in Żejtun in an outside development zone.

The development breached the original permit given on several counts and Mr Dalli was served an enforcement notice. The farmhouse came into the spotlight after this newspaper reported workers on site despite the enforcement notice.

Both Mr Dalli and his wife, Equal Opportunities Minister Helena Dalli, had said they were not aware workmen were on site even though their residential home is a few metres away. Mr Dalli said the house was the subject of a promise of sale agreement that was never published in full. While the Mepa application to sanction illegal development on site is in his name, the property is owned by one of his companies – Pada Builders Limited.

The case officer is still recommending a refusal. The board had requested the preparation of a document listing the conditions on which a full development permit would be granted.

The request for the ‘conditions of grant’ document was an indication the planning authority board was inclined to approve the permit and overturn the case officer’s recommendation, an architect told Times of Malta.

The next hearing is scheduled for February 24.

Meanwhile, the case has prompted action by the Ombudsman’s office. Planning Commissioner David Pace concluded that the case raises issues that are in the public interest and worthy of investigation.

The Opposition had argued that the planning authority should have dismissed the hearing because of the recent infringements, according to the Environment and Planning Act. Mepa countered there was no further “development” on site.

The bone of contention is therefore what is considered to be an infringement once an enforcement notice has been served, as is the case with Mr Dalli’s farmhouse. This is one of the points the Ombudsman’s office is investigating.