Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

chargesheet as Ajay Kumar Shrotriya). The nature of the unauthorized construction is described by way of deviation/excess coverage against sanctioned building plan no. 401/B/WZ/02 dated 14.02.02 at GF and FF. Thereafter, a notice u/s 344 of DMC Act, 1957 dated 03.06.02 (Ex.PW2/A) was issued under signatures of Shri V.D. Malhotra, ZE (B) for stopping over the construction failing which the action would be initiated under Section 343 DMC Act, 1957. The owner/builder Shri Sanjay Kumar Batra was also directed to show cause within three days of the issue of the notice. The notice was further served by way of affixation by the concerned JE Shri L.K. Goyal after obtaining permission to execute the same by way of pasting. Since accused Sanjay Kumar Batra failed to respond to the same, a further notice u/s 343(1) of DMC Act, 1957 dated 07.06.02 (Ex.PW2/B) was issued to the owner of the property for demolition of the property within 6 days as the construction had been carried in violation of the building bye-laws. The notice was further served by way of affixation in the presence of the departmental witnesses by Shri L.K. Goyal, JE after seeking permission of Shri V.D. Malhotra, ZE(B)/AE to serve by way of pasting. Further, since the accused Sanjay Kumar Batra failed to respond to the said notices, the demolition order dated 19.06.02 (Ex.PW3/D) was proposed by Shri L.K. Goyal, JE which was further approved by Shri V.D. Malhotra, ZE(B) and the file was sent to Officer-in-charge (Buildings) for necessary action through Shri L.K. Goyal, JE.

It is pertinent to note that at the time of registration of FIR, the extent of excess coverage against sanctioned building plan dated 14.02.02 was not specified and it was only indicated as deviation/excess coverage. In the aforesaid background, the action taken on 26.08.02 when the building may have still been under construction reflects "demolished the chhajja at first floor and ground floor". The existence of the shop in the year 2008 as observed in inspection does not lead to an automatic inference that the shop existed at the time of undergoing construction in 2002 and no action was taken by Ajay Kumar Shrotriya as reflected in entry dated 26.08.02. Rather the fact that extended chhajjas/projections were not found in existence in 2007/08 reflects that the same had been removed in 2002.