Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

4. The above-mentioned constructions were undertaken under the nose of respondent No.2 and its functionaries, who were in no mood to prevent the ex facie illegal construction. When one Mr. Nakka Prakash sought information under the Right to Information Act, respondent No.4 gave a reply on 11.12.2013 wherein while giving details of four permits in favour of respondent Nos.9 and 10 informed the applicant in reply to the query "permission details of house constructed in Plot Nos.79, 80 and 81, if the said construction is unauthorized, inform the action taken" that "the said construction is not unauthorized and the permission details are given above and that if any deviation is made against the sanctioned plan further action will be taken under the provisions of the Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation Act,1955 (for short, 'the Act') by following due process of law." Obviously realizing that the officials of respondent No.2 are indifferent to the illegal constructions, the said Nakka Prakash made another representation on 25.2.2014 wherein he has informed that respondent Nos.9 and 10 have raised G + 4 and G + 3 buildings without leaving any space for parking and even an inch of set back for running a Junior College and an E-Techno School by one Narayana Educational Institutions. However, as no action was forthcoming from the functionaries of respondent No.2 Corporation, the petitioner himself appeared to have swung into action by addressing letter dt.27.8.2014 to respondent No.4 wherein he has pointed out the following deviations. Sl. No. As per the permission Deviations in the construction

14. The acts of corruption, negligence, indolence and complicity with the builders by the officials of the Municipal bodies are destroying the concept of planned development and converting the urban areas into concrete jungles. The mushrooming of illegal and unauthorized constructions by the unscrupulous developers in collusion with the municipal corporations/municipalities is not only causing severe hardship to the inhabitants of the urban areas, but also severely affecting the ecology and environment. The lackadaisical approach of the official apparatus is emboldening the unscrupulous elements to construct buildings either unauthorizedly or in violent deviations of the sanctioned plan making the life of a common man miserable. The policy of the Government of the day to come out with schemes such as Regularization or Penalization of the plots/buildings with unfailing regularity is bolstering the activities of the perpetrators of illegal constructions and creating confidence in them that illegal constructions will pass muster, albeit at some price. It is indeed sad that the State is not considering the plight of the victims of illegal constructions while coming out with regularization/penalization schemes. Indubitably, in a welfare State, the welfare of a common man is of paramount importance and he cannot be let down. After all, laws are the foundation on which a fulfilling life is built for a community. Breaking of laws by design breaks the backbone of the community and makes it completely paralyzed.

75. Unfortunately, despite repeated judgments by this Court and the High Courts, the builders and other affluent people engaged in the construction activities, who have, over the years shown scant respect for regulatory mechanism envisaged in the municipal and other similar laws, as also the master plans, zonal development plans, sanctioned plans, etc., have received encouragement and support from the State apparatus. As and when the courts have passed orders or the officers of local and other bodies have taken action for ensuring rigorous compliance with laws relating to planned development of the cities and urban areas and issued directions for demolition of the illegal/unauthorised constructions, those in power have come forward to protect the wrongdoers either by issuing administrative orders or enacting laws for regularisation of illegal and unauthorised constructions in the name of compassion and hardship. Such actions have done irreparable harm to the concept of planned development of the cities and urban areas. It is high time that the executive and political apparatus of the State take serious view of the menace of illegal and unauthorised constructions and stop their support to the lobbies of affluent class of builders and others, else even the rural areas of the country will soon witness similar chaotic conditions."

17. Contemporaneous to the judgment in Dipak Kumar Mukherjee (2 supra), the Bench comprising the same learned Judges, in Esha Ekta Apartments Co-operative Housing Society Ltd. v. Municipal Corporation of Mumbai echoed the views of the earlier judgments.

18. The serious concern shown by the highest court of the land in the afore-mentioned judgments did not appear to have any impact whatsoever either on the violators of the building laws or on the executive governments. Undeterred by the strong indictment of regularisation schemes, the successive governments have been coming out with regularisation schemes every now and then. The schemes have been proved as havens for the violators and a curse for the society. As held by the Supreme Court in Dipak Kumar Mukherjee (2 supra), the common man feels cheated when he finds that those making illegal and unauthorized constructions are supported by the people entrusted with the duty of preparing and executing master plan/development plan/zonal plan and that the failure of the State apparatus to take prompt action to demolish such illegal constructions has convinced the citizens that planning laws are enforced only against poor and all compromises are made by the State machinery when it is required to deal with those who have money power or unholy nexus with the power corridors. This Court wonders as to in what other language the regulatory bodies, such as GHMC, must be told to curb the menace of illegal constructions, free the innocent victims from sufferance and ensure planned development?