Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

c. The Inquiry Committee, after examining the relevant documents provided by the Answering Respondents and perusing the records of Respondent No. 1, submitted its report dated 19 th October 2015 wherein it was found that the structures in the subject property were pre-existing structures, which though within the No Development Zone, had only been repaired/ renovated/ reconstructed without exceeding the plinth area, and such repair and reconstruction of existing structure was permissible within the No Development Zone and the repairs/ renovations/ reconstructions carried out were in accordance with law. A copy of the Report dated 19th October 2015 of the Inquiry Committee of Respondent No. 1 is hereto annexed and marked as Annexure R-29 at pg.281.

43. The stand taken by respondent No.1-GCZMA in the matter is that their record shows that 5 cottages, one house structure, one building, one swimming pool and one restaurant with 4 sit outs were existing in the subject property, which was being operated in the name and style as Pent House Beach Resort, located within 200 mtrs of the HTL (NDZ). Clause 6 (2)

(i) of CRZ notification 1991 provides that the area up to 200 mtrs from HTL is „No Development Zone‟, wherein no construction is permitted except for repairs of existing structures not exceeding FSI, existing plinth area and existing density. Clause 6 (2)(iv) of the said notification further provides that the construction of an existing authorized building in the NDZ is permitted subject to clause (i) thereof. Thus, repairs and reconstruction are permitted in NDZ vide clause 6 (2) of the CRZ notification 1991. A similar provision is also given in CRZ notification 2011 as well in clause 8(III)(A)(CRZ III)(ii).

h. Minutes of the 13th meeting of the Eco-Development Council held on 19.07.1988 approving the construction of recreation facilities along with swimming pool in the subject property."

48. It is further mentioned that respondent no.4 thereafter submitted another application dated 14.11.2007 seeking approval of the answering respondent to carry out repairs and renovation of two existing structures i.e. „A‟ and „C‟, which proposals were examined by the answering respondent in its 38th meeting held on 12.12.2007 and decided to grant approval for repairs and renovation of these structures as well in accordance with CRZ notification 1991, subject to condition that repairs and renovation of the existing structures in the subject property shall not exceed the existing FSI, existing plinth area and existing density and shall conform to the local building bye laws.

50. It is further mentioned that on 20.06.2012 respondent nos. 3 and 4 submitted revised plans to the answering respondent as according to them the existing structures were in dilapidated condition and the foundations of building were severely damaged. It was also informed that a major portion of the structures was beyond repairs and had to be reconstructed in order to strengthen the foundation. In view of the said request for revision of plans, the answering respondent vide its letter dated 23.07.2012 requested the DSLR to verify whether the repairs/renovation & reconstruction was in consonance with the revised plan submitted by the Project Proponent. The DSLR vide its report dated 30.07.2012 confirmed that the repairs, renovation & reconstruction were in terms of the revised plans submitted on 20.06.2012 and that the plinth size was as per earlier approvals. The Authority/ answering respondent, therefore, granted approval to the revised plan of the respondent nos. 3 & 4, vide its letter dated 23.08.2012 in terms of Clause 8(i)(III)(CRZ-III)(A)(ii) of the CRZ notification 2011. The total plinth area of the structures was again found to be 2030 sq. mtrs excluding the swimming pool of 115 sq. mtrs.