Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
Before
The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Hemant Gupta
The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Kuldip Singh
CWP No. 2728 of 1992(O&M)
Dr. Gurbinder Kaur & Ors.
v.
Estate Officer, U.T. Chandigarh & Ors.
{Decided on 25/08/2014}
(B) Capital of Punjab (Development and Regulation) Building Rules, 1952, R.22--Resumption Order--Contention that additional grounds other than mentioned in notice cannot be pressed by the Administration to support the resumption order in present petition--Contention rejected--Held; the subsequent events can always be taken into consideration so as to find out whether the misuse is continuing or not--If an occupier is entitled to benefit of the cessation of misuse subsequent to the order of resumption, on the same analogy another act of misuse can always be brought to the notice of the Court to support the order of resumption. (Para 20)
(C) Capital of Punjab (Development and Regulation) Building Rules, 1952, R.22--Resumption Order--Multiple directions have been issued by Administration from time to time--Administration advised to either amend Building Bye Laws comprehensively or to issue comprehensive directions in respect of permitted use of basement, ground floor, first floor and second floor in the commercial buildings as well as in the residential buildings--The Administration should take into consideration the ever growing need of the residents of the city where there is acute shortage of the residential and commercial property so as to permit use of basement for wider purposes rather than restricting its use only for non-residential habitable use. (Para 22)
Mr. Hemant Gupta, J.: - The challenge in the present writ petition is to an order dated 07.06.1982 passed by the Estate Officer, Union Territory (for short ‘U.T’) Chandigarh, resuming Site No.1064-65, Sector 22-B, Chandigarh and forfeiting a sum of Rs.20,100/- representing 10% of the price of the site to the Government; an order passed by the Chief Administrator, U.T. Chandigarh on 04.04.1989 upholding the order passed by the Estate Officer, as also the order passed by the Adviser to the Administrator, U.T. Chandigarh on 20.12.1991 affirming the order passed by the Chief Administrator as also the order passed in review petition on 05.02.1992 whereby the Adviser to the Administrator, U.T. Chandigarh dismissed the review petition filed by the petitioner.
2. The petitioners are purchasers of site in question in an auction held on 09.05.1971. The site in question was to be used for general trade in terms of conditions of letter of allotment. After completion of the building, the building constructed on the site was let out to various tenants. On account of misuse, that the partitions made in the shop and the show window had been converted into sale booth, the Estate Officer passed an order of resumption on 07.06.1982. However, such order was affirmed in appeal and revision.
3. During the pendency of the present writ petition, the Chief Administrator has issued various directions permitting certain changes in the similar sites in question including partitions. This Court on 03.10.2013 directed the respondents to inspect the spot and submit report since the resumption has been ordered on the basis of building violations. Inspection report dated 13.11.2013 has been placed on record, which reads as under:-
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sr. No. Building Violations Present Status Remarks
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Partition has been Still exist at site at The partition/cabins
made in the shop. the time of inspection. constructed at ground
floor i.e. shop of height
7’-0" for the independent
users i.e. 13 cabins exist
at site. As per the PAC
(Lower) members the
same not sanctionable,
only one sub-division of
the shop is allowed at
ground floor subject to
payment, if the owner
submit revised plan.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. Show window has Set right at site. Glazing has been
been converted into provided.
sale booth
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Additional
violations:
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Front and rear Still exist at site at Glazing provided at +/- 0"
Elevation of the the time of level in front and rear
building changed inspection. elevation. As per PAC (L)
members, Glazing at
first and second floor in
the front and rear elevation
is allowed subject to
payment, if the owner
submit the revised
building plan.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. Partitions/cabins Still exist at site at The partitions/cabins
constructed at the time of constructed at ground,
ground, first and inspection. first and second floor
second floor. occupied by the different
independent users i.e.
shops. As per PAC
(Lower) members,
numbers of shops with
different uses are not
allowed. Only one sub-
division of the shop is
allowed at ground floor
subject to payment.
Only office wooden
cabin parti
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
