A board of inquiry set up to recommend whether further action should be taken against planning authority employees over their handling of two applications found no evidence of collusion, but said they interpreted guidelines in a "loose" manner.
One of the cases involved a permit issued for the construction of a supermarket in Luqa, approved in April 2007. The application had been filed by developer Charles Polidano on behalf of the Lidl chain.
The second concerned the construction of four semi-detached and a detached bungalow close to the Victoria Lines in Naxxar. The application, filed by hotelier Kevin De Cesare, was approved in February 2008.
When he conducted an inquiry into the applications, Malta Environment and Planning Authority audit officer Joe Falzon said there were irregularities.
Upon receiving Mr Falzon's preliminary reports, the Mepa board last July commissioned a board of inquiry to investigate the cases to establish whether the Planning Directorate adhered to the relevant policies for the respective sites, whether it had given these policies enough weight and if the directorate had used excessive discretion.
The board was also responsible to identify whether disciplinary action could be taken against any of the employees and whether there was enough evidence for the authority to ask the police to investigate.
In his report on the supermarket project, Mr Falzon had described the go-ahead for the development on land outside development zone as a "gross irregularity".
Mr Falzon had lambasted the board for unanimously approving the project, despite a recommendation for refusal by the Planning Directorate. Essentially the report concluded that such a permit should have never been issued on land outside the development zone.
The report had led to the resignation en bloc of all the Development Control Commission in February 2008.
In his report for the development of four semi-detached and a detached bungalow, Mr Falzon said the application had not been processed according to policy guidelines.
But the board of inquiry, composed of Joseph Farrugia, Charles Bonnici and Joseph Tabone Jacono, concluded there was "no malicious or criminal intent in their behaviour".
Although it found no illegal behaviour, the board said the employees had interpreted guidelines loosely, as they were accustomed to doing, without realising that they had stepped beyond what is normally acceptable according to Mepa policies.
"This should not be allowed to happen again, and the case officer and the team manager should be warned so that policies and guidelines are more closely respected," the board said.
With regard to the supermarket application close to the airport, for which a development permit had been issued in spite of objections by Malta International Airport and the Department of Civil Aviation, the board said objections should have been given greater weight.
On the other application, the board said the Planning Directorate employees should have been informed about decisions taken by the Mepa Board that could affect the deliberations and outcome of recommendation when processing planning applications.
It also recommended that while it might be acceptable to a degree that there is a certain amount of flexibility in the interpretation of Mepa guidelines and policies when applied to projects of national interest because of their scale or function, this should not be the case when applied to a residential housing project.
The board also emphasised that objections by local councils and other authorities should be given more weight.
In this case, it said, the objections of the council were "presented very well and in detail" and that its points "were valid".
In both cases, the board did not believe there were enough reasons for criminal action to be taken against the employees but said they should be warned not to commit similar mistakes in future.