Supreme Court - Daily Orders
Gurubinder Kaur vs The Estate Officer, Chandigarh ... on 1 May, 2017
Bench: A.K. Sikri, Ashok Bhushan
ITEM NO.47 COURT NO.8 SECTION IVB
S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (C) No. 36349/2014
(Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 25/08/2014
in CWP No. 2728/1992 passed by the High Court of Punjab & Haryana
at Chandigarh)
GURUBINDER KAUR & ORS. Petitioner(s)
VERSUS
THE ESTATE OFFICER, CHANDIGARH
ADMINISTRATION & ORS. Respondent(s)
(With interim relief and office report)
Date : 01/05/2017 This petition was called on for hearing today.
CORAM :
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. SIKRI
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK BHUSHAN
For Petitioner(s)
Mr. P. S. Patwalia, Sr. Adv.
Mr. Tushar Bakshi, Adv.
For Respondent(s)
Mr. Gopal Singh, Adv.
Ms. Vimla Sinha, Adv.
UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following
O R D E R
The respondents have undertaken inspection of the premises in question and has submitted the inspection report with their remarks. We reproduce the same in its entirety:
Sr. Building Present Remarks
No. Violations Status
1.
Signature Not Verified
Partition has Still The partition/cabin constructed
Digitally signed by been made in exist at at ground floor i.e. shop of
NIDHI AHUJA
Date: 2017.05.12
10:41:03 IST
the shop site at height 7'-10” for the
the time independent users i.e. 13
Reason:
of cabins exist at the site. The
1
SLP (C)No. 36349/2014
inspection matter has been discussed with the members of Plan Approval Committee and they stated that only two subdivisions allowed at G. Floor through submission revised building plan subject to approval of PAC and payment of composition fee as per building byelaws. As per the PAC (Lower) members the same is not sanctionable in present shape, only two sub-division of the shop is allowed at ground floor subject to payment, if the owner submit revised plan for its approval.
2. Show window Set right Glazing has been provided.
has been at site
converted into
sale booth
Additional
violations
1. Front and rear Still Glazing provided at +/-O level
Elevation of exist at in front and rear elevation.
the building site at As per PAC (L) members, Glazing
changed the time at first and second floor in
of the front and rear elevation is
inspection allowed subject to payment, if
the owner submit the revised
building plan for its approval.
2. Partitions/cab Still The partitions/cabins ins exist at constructed at ground, first constructed at site at and second floor occupied by ground, first the time the different independent users and second of i.e. shops. As per PAC (Lower) floor inspection members, numbers of shops with different users are not allowed. Only two sub-division of the shop is allowed at ground floor subject to payment. Only office wooden cabin partition with air conditioned at first and second floor for single use, if the owner submits the revised building plan for its approval.
3. Partitions/cab Still Non-Sanctionable. The basement ins exists. used for the habitable purpose, 2 SLP (C)No. 36349/2014 constructed in i.e., shops running in the basement basement and used by the independent users. As the matter has been discussed with the members of Plan Approval Committee (Lower), shops in basement are not allowed.
Habitable use of the basement is allowed on subject to payment with sufficient light and ventilation with 100% power back-up for single use under rules as per building byelaws.
4. Extra stairs Still Sanctionability through revised constructed on exist building plan and taking the rear side habitable use of the basement leading to and subject to the approval of basement which PAC.
is not
sanctioned in
the sanctioned
plan
5. Toilet Still Sanctionability through
positions exist submission of Revised Building
changed at Plan and subject to approval of
Ground, First PAC as per building bye laws
& Second Floor rules.
against the
sanctioned
plan
It is pertinent to mention here that regarding sanctionable violations the owner will have to submit the Revised Building Plan as per the present status at site and the same shall be forwarded to Plan Approval Committee (PAC) for its scrutiny. If the same violations as per present status of site covered in submitted plan and approved by the plan approval committee then the composition fee will be charged from the owner after following the due process as per building bye laws rules.” Mr. Patwalia, learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioners, has submitted that the petitioners have no objection in submitting the revised plan and the petitioners 3 SLP (C)No. 36349/2014 shall also pay the composition fee, wherever it is payable.
He points out that at present the premises are in occupation of tenant and, therefore, it will not be immediately possible to remove the partition/cabin. Let the required application be moved for composition fee etc. within four weeks on which the respondent authority shall pass order specifying the amount of composition fee payable. When that order is passed, the fee shall be paid within four weeks thereafter.
In order to show the bona fides, learned counsel has drawn four Demand Drafts of about 22 lakhs rupees which are handed over to the learned counsel for the respondent in the Court today.
List the matter in the month of September, 2017 for further orders and in order to see whether the aforesaid directions are complied with or not.
(Nidhi Ahuja) (Mala Kumari Sharma)
Court Master Court Master
4