TMI Blog2016 (4) TMI 1287X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d by any individual, Corporate body, Government or its instrumentalities etc., approved on and after 1.1.2001 till date and henceforth. In respect to sanctioned plan of city etc., the same shall also be placed on website. In respect to individual plan(s)/map(s), as above, which shall include colonies, townships etc., the sanctioned plan(s)/map(s) etc. shall be placed on website wherever the area of land is 200 square meters and above; or the building constructed and owned by an individual for his own use, but is three storied and above. In case there is any data problem in a single website, the ADA may open more sites locality wise etc., as advised technically. (iii) If any developer, builder, contractor, individual or corporate or Government etc., as the case may be, has violated sanctioned plan/map and has applied for compounding, the kind of violation and the order passed by ADA compounding the said violation, if any, the reasons for the same and the procedure followed therein shall also be made known to the public at large by giving details on the website, as directed above. (iv) The ADA shall also give details of officers responsible for sanction, inspection, enforcement ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d it shall submit its first report in six months after its constitution to the Court.” - C.M.W.P. No. 7176 of 1981 - - - Dated:- 18-4-2016 - Sudhir Agarwal And Rakesh Srivastava, JJ. For the Petitioner : Kuldip Amist, A. K. Mishra, Jagdish Swarup, V. K. Singh, G. K. Singh For the Respondent : S. C., Brij Mohhan, Ashok Mohiley JUDGMENT Sudhir Agarwal and Rakesh Srivastava, JJ. 1. Heard Sri G.K. Singh, Senior Advocate assisted by Sri V.K. Singh, learned Counsel for petitioners. None appeared for respondent Allahabad Development Authority (hereinafter referred to as ADA ) though it has been called in revised. Hence we proceed to decide it after hearing Counsel for petitioner only. The writ petition is directed against order dated 2.3.1981 sent by opposite party No. 2 alongwith Secretary, ADA revoking order dated 27.2.1979 whereby proposed construction at 21 B, Civil Station/25-A, Mahatma Gandhi Marg, Allahabad was sanctioned. The reason for revoking permission is that it was obtained by fraud. 2. Brief facts giving rise to the present writ petition are as under : 3. The disputed premises being site No. 21 Civil Station, Allahabad was a Nazul land. By ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hapoorji to the extent of 1 Acre (3000 sq. yards) at site No. 21 for an amount of premium of ₹ 88,200/- and annual rent of ₹ 647.93 and in respect to Sri Satyendra Singh and Smt. Indra Mohini Government recommended new lease for commercial purpose for an area of 4839 sq. yards at premium amount of ₹ 54,438.75 and annual rent off 399.91. 7. Collector required aforesaid beneficiaries to deposit amount of premium and annual rent vide letter dated 24.7.1967 and also to execute fresh new lease deeds. 8. Smt. Shapoorji filed suit No. 4 of 1968 in Civil Court in so far as State Government proposed to grant lease at site No. 21 Civil Station in favour of Smt. Indra Mohini and Sri Satyendra Singh. It is said that said suit ended in compromise between Mrs. G.S.J. Shapoorji and other two incumbents. 9. Further, Smt. Shapoorji on her own, parted-away commercial area 21 in favour of Smt. Kamlesh Goswamy, Smt. Kamla Singh, M/s. Law Book Company (Publications) and Smt. Urmila Kumari. Smt. Shapoorji on 6.3.1971 executed a registered agreement to sell plots No. 1 and 1-A in favour of Kamlesh Goswamy by dividing site No. 21 into five plots numbering 1, 1-A, 2, 3 and 4. Smt ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 5237 22.12.75 562988 8,820/- 11. Another agreement was executed on 7.8.1975 between Smt. Shapoorji and Kamlesh Goswamy and as a part performance thereof possession was given by petitioner-1 to petitioner-2. 12. Petitioner-2 claimed that it had purchased disputed land by paying entire sale confederation to petitioner-1 but no sale-deed has been executed since there was no lease deed executed in favour of petitioner-1 by State Government. Mrs. Shapoorji then wrote letter dated 7.8.1975 to Mukhya Nagar Adhikari, Nagar Mahapalika, Allahabad stating that Smt. Kamlesh Goswamy is authorised to manage premises bearing Municipal No. 4 and 51-A(old 25-A and 25). 13. A proposal to construct a building on the disputed land was submitted under signature of petitioner-1 with formal letter of petitioner-2 to Nagar Aabhiyanta, Nagar Mahapalika, Allahabad. Petitioner-1 was communicated by respondent-1 that the plan was not approved and a compounding plan be submitted to regularise constructions already made on disputed land on the basis of unapproved plan. The plan for compounding was submitted to respondent-1 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eafter lease was renewed for a period of 50 years vide indenture dated 22.8.1912 in favour of Mrs. Francis Margarett Adlaide Sarkes. On the request of S.J. Shapoorji, successor in title of Mrs. Sarkies, partition of site was sanctioned by Collector, Allahabad in two parts subject to enhancement of rent by 50%. Consequently, two separate leases were executed in joint names of S.J. Shapoorji and Mr. G.S.J. Shapoorji for the residue period of existing terms of lease of 1912 with permission to carry on business in the premises. These leases were executed on 20.5.1949 registered on 30 5.1949 and expired on 6.2.1961 without any right of further renewal. 19. A fresh lease was permitted for a portion of Nazul site No. 21 measuring one acre and 3000 sq. yards in favour of Mrs. G.S.J. Shapoorji on payment of premium of ₹ 88,200/- and annual rent of ₹ 647.93. However, premium and lease rent was not paid in time either by Mrs. G.S.J. Shapoorji or Smt. Indra Mohini and Sri Satyendra Singh. In fact Indra Mohini paid installments of ground floor on her behalf while Sri Satyendra Singh committed default. Indra Mohini was allowed lease only for half portion of the remaining site. It ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... re Supreme Court where it held that mere acceptance of rent would not signify assent of continuance of lease even after expiry of lease period. 24. In the present case, it is stated that after expiry of lease, a request was made for renewal but since lease had expired, lessor i.e., State Government did not convey its consent for renewal but subsequently a letter was issued permitting a fresh lease on certain conditions. Thus, in the present case there was no question of exercise of option of renewal, hence question of otherwise assent on the part of lessor, permitting petitioners or lessees to continue in possession of land does not arise. 25. The aforesaid decision in Shanti Prasad (supra) was followed in Sarup Singh Gupta v. S. Jagish Singh and others 2006 (63) ALR 468 (SC) : 2006 (41) AIC 70. Therein Court said mere acceptance of rent for the subsequent amount in which lessee continued to occupy premises even after expiry of period of lease, cannot be said to be a conduct signifying his assent for continuance of lease even after expiry of lease period. A positive act of acceptance of rent was not held sufficient to signil assent to continue lease. In the present case eve ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o the State Government after the entrustment of the land to that local authority, not being land vested in or entrusted to the management of a Gaon Sabha or any other local authority, under any law relating to land tenures): (ii) any premises acquired under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 with the consent of the State Government for a company (as defined in that Act) and held by that company under an agreement executed under section 41 of that Act providing for re-entry by the State Government in certain conditions: (Emphasis added) 28. Definition of 'unauthorized occupation clearly includes occupation of a public premises by a person after expiry of authority to occupy such land which includes a person whose period of lease has expired and still he or she is continuing in possession. Public Premises includes any premises belonging to or taken on lease including nazul land . 29. Thus, after expiry of lease, lessee became unauthorised occupant of 'Nazul land' and could have been evicted from public premises under provisions of aforesaid Act, 1972. 30. Considering similar provision in the context of Uttar Pradesh Public Premises (Eviction of Unau ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... applied to DDA for conversion of lease land to free hold and deposited a sum of ₹ 96,41,892/- towards conversion charges. DDA rejected the said application of subsequent purchaser. Aggrieved thereof, subsequent purchaser preferred writ petition No. 10015 of 2005 in Delhi High Court which was disposed of vide order dated 19.7.2007, directing DDA to decide subsequent purchase's request for conversion of premises from lease hold to freehold. Thereafter, High Court also dismissed DDA's second appeal holding that act of demand and acceptance of rent tantamounts to renewal of lease of disputed property. It is this judgment passed in second appeal which came to be considered before Supreme Court in the aforesaid matter. One of contentions raised on behalf of DDA was that original lessee created interest in the disputed property in favour of subsequent purchaser during the period when original lessee itself was not a lease holder since lease stood terminated by efflux of time. It was contended that original lessee had no title or interest in property which could have been transferred to subsequent purchaser and said transfer is void and not binding on DDA. Next ground was th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... efore, in the instant case, as per Clause (iii)(b) of the lease deed and sections 21 and 22 of the DD Act read with Rule 43 of the Nazul Land Rules and in the light of Shanti Prasad Devi, Sarup Singh Gupta and Ashoka Marketing Ltd. cases (supra), there cannot be an automatic renewal of lease in favour of the original lessee once it stands terminated by efflux of time and also by issuing notice terminating the lease. Merely accepting the amount towards the rent by the office of the DDA after expiry of the lease period shall not be construed as renewal of lease of the premises in question in favour of the original lessee, for another period of 20 years as contended by the respondent. 34. In Delhi Development Authority v. Anant Raj Agencies Pvt. Ltd. (supra) Court considered that land vested in DDA was a 'Nazul land' and that being so, power has been conferred upon DDA to grant lease which includes renewal of lease but in absence of said renewal of lease of property as required in law, original lessee cannot claim an automatic renewal in his favour. Court held as under: Thus, it is abundantly clear from the aforesaid legal statutory provisions of the DD Act and terms ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... roperty cannot transfer the same by way of sale-deed. Thus original lessee could not transfer a valid right to subsequent purchaser. Further, fact that subsequent purchaser deposited conversion charges in the office of DDA, also would make no difference. Original lessee in absence of renewal of lease, himself having become an unauthorized occupant of property and a transaction between original lessee and subsequent purchaser would have no legal consequence. Thus anything done between DDA and original lessee will also have no consequence. Court therefore, answered second question as under: The instant case having peculiar facts and circumstances, namely, after 10.8.1968 the lease stands terminated by efflux of time, which is further evidently clear from the termination notice dated 1.9.1972 and thereafter, the original lessee becomes an unauthorised occupant in terms of section 2(g) of the Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) Act, 1971 and consequently, not entitled to deal with the property in question in any manner. The very concept of conversion of leasehold rights to freehold rights is not applicable to the fact situation. 38. In the light of above e ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... h none had any right whatsoever, either to transfer or to acquire. 42. In the State of U.P., Nazul Manual contains Rules with regard to 'Nazul land' and it is not the case of petitioners before this Court that any lease deed in accordance with provisions of Nazul Manual has been executed between petitioner-1 or State Government through Collector on or after 7.2.1961. 43. The concept of public premises and removal of unauthorized occupants in the State of U.P. is also governed by U.P. Act, 1972. Unauthorized Occupants and whatsoever has been held in Delhi Development Authority v. Anant Raj Agencies Pvt. Ltd. (supra) with reference to Act, 1972, is equally applicable to Public Premises in the State of U.P. also since provisions are pari materia. 44. Thus, disclosure of all these facts to ADA was a condition precedent for petitioner-1 and petitioner-2. Mere fact that map was sanctioned and thereafter constructions were raised, would make no difference for the reason that all transactions were void ab initio. The petitioners had no right over land, they were unauthorised occupants, hence question of making construction by getting a map sanctioned by ADA does not aris ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... office of the Allahabad Development Authority, Allahabad. The number and date of the receipt register has been put on the back of the map as Serial No. 796 dated 21st September, 1978, whereas the actual date of the serial No. 796 is 2nd of September, 1978. It is further stated that Smt. Shapoorji put down the correct date below her signature on the plan as 11.1.1979 but later on the conspirators changed the date so that their conspiracy may not be detected. 47. Learned Counsel for the petitioners, however, submitted that petitioners earlier submitted map which was returned and thereafter they submitted another map dated 11.9.1978. Our attention has been drawn to paragraph 36 but no material has been placed before this Court to show that earlier map was returned and another map was submitted. 48. It is further stated in paragraph 38 of the counter-affidavit that petitioner-2 has set up a false story regarding submission of map and return and these facts are totally false. Petitioners have not placed anything on record to substantiate the plea they have taken. It is true that on administrative side, judicial order once passed is not to be reviewed unless power is provided in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ited India Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Rajendru Singh and others 2001 (42) ALR 451 (SC) the Apex Court observed as under: 3. Fraud and justice never dwell together. (Trans et jus nunquam cohabitant) is a pristine maxim which has never lost its temper over all these centuries. Lord Denning observed in a language without equivocation that no Judgment of a Court, no order of Minister can be allowed to stand if it has been obtained by fraud, for, fraud unravels everything (Lazarus Estate Ltd. v. Beasley) 1956 (1) QB 702. 52. This is what has been referred to and followed by this Court in Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. No. 14824 of 1990 (Shamsuddin and others v. Addl. District Judge, Azamgarh) decided on 31.10.2011. 53. The Full Bench judgment relied on by petitioner in Gopal Dass and others v. 1st Additional District Judge, Varanasi 1987 (13) ALR 275 (FB) in the above facts and circumstances has no application at all and reliance placed is wholly misplaced. The issue up for consideration before Full Bench in that case was whether the application filed under section 15 (2) for release of a premises should be signed by all co-owners or even a single co-owner is competent to maint ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... opment Authority is not empowered to continue such illegal unauthorized constructions by realizing some amount. 58. No such Statutory provision has been brought to our notice or placed before us for consideration. We have examined various provisions of the Statute and like to place on record our findings and observations thereof. First of all, it would be appropriate to reproduce the interim order initially passed by a vacation Judge on 26.6.1981 when the writ petition was filed during vacation. Issue notice. Until further order of this Court, the implementation of the order dated 2.12.1980, communicated on 2.3.1981(contained in Annexure-18 to the writ petition) shall remain stayed for a period of six weeks. 59. Thereafter, matter came up before the Division Bench on 7.8.1981 and the Court passed following order : Until further orders of this Court, the implementation of the impugned order dated 2.3.1981 contained in Annexure-18 shall remain stayed. However under the cover of this stay order and otherwise, petitioners would not be entitled to make further construction of the building. It, will, however, be open to the petitioner to move the application for pe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 63. The procedure of preparation and approval of Master Plan is provided in sections 10, 11 and 12 which need not be discussed at this stage since sanction of Master Plan and its enforcement on various dates with respect to different periods under the relevant statute is not disputed. 64. Section 13 talks of amendment of plan. Section 16 prohibits use of land and building in contravention of plans. 65. Section 10 (1) clarifies that the word Plan in sections 11, 12, 14 and 16 would mean Master Plan as well as the Zonal Development Plan for a Zone. 66. Section 13 permits an Authority to make such amendment in the Plan which do not effect important alterations in the character of the plan and do not relate to the extent of land uses or standards of population density. Sub-section (2) of section 13, however, confers full power upon State Government to make amendment in the plan. Sub-sections (3), (4) and (5) however provide procedure of such amendments whether proposed to be made by Authority or by the State Government . It read as under: (3) Before making any amendments in the plan, the Authority, or, as the case may be, the State Government shall publish a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Vice-Chairman or such officer may think fit. (2) Where an offence has been compounded, the offender, if in custody, shall be discharged and no further proceedings shall be taken against him in respect of the offence compounded. 72. Section 53 confers power upon State Government to exempt, by issuing a Notification in the Gazette, any land or building or classes of land or buildings from all or any of the provisions of the Act or Rules or Regulations framed thereunder. It is not the case of the petitioners that any such exemption is applicable in this case. 73. Further, power to make Rules has been conferred upon State Government vide section 55 for carrying out the purposes of Act. The Authorities have been given power to make Regulations under section 56 which must be consistent with the Act, 1973 and the Rules framed thereunder. Such Regulations can be made for the administration of affairs of Authority. 74. It may also be pointed out at this stage that where development is allowed to any person or body, such development shall also be consistent with the plan. 75. This Court finds no provision under the Act, 1973 which entitles the Authority to go for prof ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... dure and nothing can be done in a manner other than the procedure prescribed in the statute. 78. When law requires something to be done in a particular manner, things done otherwise are prohibited. This principle was recognized in Nazir Ahmad v. King-Emperor AIR 1936 PC 253 and, thereafter it has been reiterated and followed consistently by the Apex Court in a catena of judgments, which I do not propose to refer all but would like to refer a few recent one. 79. In Dhananjaya Reddy v. State of Karnataka. 2001 (4) SCC 9 in para 23 of the judgment the Court held: It is a settled principle of law that where a power is given to do a certain thing in a certain manner, the thing must be done in that way or not at all. 80. In Commissioner of Income Tax, Mumbai v. Anjum M.H. Ghaswala 2002 (1) SCC 633, it was held: It is a normal rule of construction that when a statute vests certain power in an authority to be exercised in a particular manner then the said authority has to exercise it only in the manner provided in the statute itself. 81. The judgments in Anjum M.H. Ghaswala (supra) and Dhananjaya Reddy (supra) laying down the aforesaid principle have been followed ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... consequences also. The Authority has been empowered and is also under an obligation to make the things right by removing such violation/deviation and restoring the Plan in its notified state. The basic object of Authority is development and not destruction or devastation or diminution of an otherwise development, already made. 86. A deviation or violation of a Scheme or Plan cannot be made a means of profiteering by collecting huge amount from offenders/violators and permitting them to continue to enjoy such deviation. If this stand is sustained, it would mean that the Statute is being read in a manner so as to confer an immunity upon the resourceful people to violate law and permit them to continue to enjoy such violation for all times to come by paying some amount to the authority. These violators basically come from elite class. They find it easier vis- -vis their status to part away any amount of money so as to retain resultant deviation of plan. It adds to their status also. Most of the builders have made it a part of their business. Simultaneously the development authority also stand financially (officially and privately) benefited in allowing contravention of plan and vi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ducement (as of a public official) by improper means (as bribery) to violate duty (as by committing a felony). It is an specially pernicious form of discrimination. Apparently its purpose is to seek favourable, privileged treatment from those who are in authority. No one would indulge in corruption at all if those who are in authority, discharge their service by treating all equally. 55. We can look into it from another angle. Corruption also violates human rights. It discriminates against the poor by denying them access to public services and preventing from exercising their political rights on account of their incapability of indulging in corruption, of course on account of poverty and other similar related factors. Corruption is, therefore, divisive and makes a significant contribution to social inequality and conflict. It undermines respect for authority and increases cynicism. It discourages participation of individuals in civilised society and elevates self interest as a guide to conduct. In social terms we can say that corruption develops a range bound field of behaviour, attitude and beliefs. Corruption is antithesis of good governance and democratic politics. It is s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ncluding restrictions necessary for effective implementation of such plans. They respect the laws enacted by legislature for regulating planned development of cities. One finds seldom complaint of violation of master plan etc. in construction of building; residential, institutional or commercial. 89. Unfortunately, the developing countries are example of depicting a scenario substantially different. This includes India and in particular certain northern States like State of Uttar Pradesh. These are example of blatant and scant respect to master plans and the laws relating thereto. The competent legislature though has enacted laws with pious objective of planned development in the cities and area governed by local bodies but the enforcing machinery is extremely negligent and casual. They work hand in gloves with violators. The violators, i.e., the beneficiaries of direct violation of plans and the authorities responsible for restricting such violation both work with a sense of immunity from any consequential act. 90. Reflecting similar ethos, the Apex Court in Shanti Sports Club and another v. Union of India and others 2009(15) SCC 705 has said in paragraphs No. 74 and 75 as u ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... unicipal and other laws and emphasized that no compromise should be made with the town planning scheme and no relief should be given to the violator of the town planning scheme etc. on the ground that he has spent substantial amount on construction of the buildings etc. 75. Unfortunately, despite repeated judgments by the this Court and 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 of laws relating to planned development of the cities and urban areas and issued directions for demolition of the illegal/unauthorized constructions, those in power have come forward to protect the wrong doers either by issuing administrative orders or enacting laws for regularization of illegal and unauthorized constructions in the name of compassion and hardship ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... against the public interest and hazardous to the safety of occupiers and residents of multi-storeyed buildings. To some extent both parties can be said to be equally responsible for this. Still the greater loss would be of those flat owners whose flats are to be demolished as compared to the Builder. 94. In M.C. Mehta v. Union of India and others JT 2006(2) SC 448 the Court expressed its anguish against mass violation of master plans and total inaction on the part of authorities responsible to execute it and said: .....this Court cannot remain a mute spectator when the violations also affect the environment and healthy living of law-abiders. The enormity of the problem which, to a great extent, is the doing of the authorities themselves, does not mean that a beginning should not be made to set things right. If the entire misuser cannot be stopped at one point of time because of. its extensive nature, then it has to be stopped in a phased manner, beginning with major violators. There has to be a will to do it........The things cannot be permitted to go on in this manner forever. On one hand, various laws are enacted, master plans are prepared by expert planners, provision ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ch does not affect the basic character of the plan.... 22.... the Authority cannot amend the plan under section 13(1) so as to deprive the public of a public park. Not only the G.D.A. even the State Government cannot alter the plan under section 13(1) carries several limitations, section 13(2) gives the State Government unlimited powers to make amendments in the plan of the nature specified in sub-section (1) or otherwise.... (Emphasis added) 97. Striking heavily against unauthorised constructions, in M.I. Builders Pvt. Ltd. v. Radhey Shyam Shahu and others 1999 (37) ALR 4 (Sum.) : AIR 1999 SC 2468 it was said that the Courts while implementing rule of law show no consideration to the builders or any other person responsible for unauthorised construction etc. Being illegal it cannot be compounded and has to be demolished. The judicial discretion which includes equitable extraordinary exercise of power would not include a discretion to be exercised to encourage illegality or something which would perpetuate illegality. Justice must be rendered in accordance with law. Judges are not entitled to exercise discretion wearing the robes of judicial discretion and pass orde ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sult whereof, such illegal construction could undergo unabated and unchecked well in time. There is no attempt to fix accountability and take appropriate action. 101. All these demonstrate a patent illegal act on the part of a statutory body and its officials. Nothing serious has been done though violators have also committed an offence under Act, 1973. No attempt has been made to lodge any report for initiating criminal proceeding(s) against anybody. A system of mutual protection developed amongst the bureaucracy has shown its reflection in its true colour. 102. The Development Authorities were constituted with an objective of coordinated development but the experience is that largely it has failed to achieve its objectives. The open areas in cities have been converted into jungles of concrete. The roads have turned into parking. One finds it very difficult to move conveniently even in the main commercial areas of cities. This kind of destruction and defacement is going on rampant even in the areas shown as residential. Commercial activities like coaching centres, nursing homes, banks, banquet halls etc. are being run in residential areas without any hindrance causing a diff ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ce with law exercising rights available to him but such development cannot be made so as to disturb the general plan conceived by a statutory authority in accordance with statute as that would cause and bound to cause prejudice/detriment, in various ways to other residents in that area. It is bound to affect the amenities, benefits, facilities, natural and otherwise of the residents. A deviation for the benefit of an individual or a section cannot be allowed as that is essentially bound to cause some detrimental effect on the society at large even if the degree of detriment may be very small and sometimes microscopic. The reason being that even microscopic detriment, if caused by a substantial number of individuals/group of individuals, collectively may become a bigger one. 104. In order to find out whether a person in the neighborhood has violated law, one should not be made to depend on the vagaries and indiscreet whims of development authorities and other local bodies. There should be a system where this information must be available maintaining a total transparency so that whenever there is a deviation causing detriment to residents and/or the society in general, appropriate ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... g the said violation, if any, the reasons for the same and the procedure followed therein shall also be made known to the public at large by giving details on the website, as directed above. (iv) The ADA shall also give details of officers responsible for sanction, inspection, enforcement and approval of plan/map, the actual execution thereof and implementation of plan in respect to respective areas and the officers who remained posted since 1.1.2000 and onwards in respect to above work and their period of function shall also be let known to public at large. (v) A High Powered Committee shall also be constituted in ADA headed by a retired judicial officer, not below the rank of District Judge, to find out year wise deviation in the implementation of plan who shall submit its periodical report every fortnight to ADA and it shall then be the responsibility of ADA through its Vice Chairman and Secretary to seek remedial steps in the light of report received and remove illegal encroachment, obstruction, construction etc. without any further delay. (vi) The ADA will also specify and shall make it known to public at large by placing relevant information on website as to wh ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
