Builders must display details: HC to AMC

In a singnificant order, the Gujarat High Court today directed the Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation(AMC) to ensure that builders of structures under construction put up notices giving details like name of the developer, name of land owner, type of zone(residential or commercial), survey number of property, type of permission(residential or commercial), date of approval of plan as well as details of provisions made for fire-safety.

The court also directed that no builder should hand over premises to clients before building use(BU) permission is granted.

The directions were issued by a division bench comprising Justice B.C.Patel and Justice P.B.Majmudar in two separate public interest litigations(PILs). While the first PIL sought direction to take action against officials responsible for negligence resulting in unauthorised constructions in the city, the other challenged the AMC’s notification regularising illegal constructions by charging certain licence fee.

The first PIL-filed by Upendra M. Patel-has given a list of 26 buildings where building laws have been flouted.

The court took a serious view of the fact that in a number of instances, the AMC had not taken action for violation of building laws, Despite absence of stay orders from court. The court directed the AMC to inform it about the action that had been taken in the matter. If no action has been taken, the court has asked the AMC to provide reasons for that. It has also sought know the time period in which the AMC would take action in such instances. "Impression is created that at the sweet will of the officers, actions are being taken," the court observed.

The court listed a number of buildings against which no actions has been taken by the AMC though there is no stay. These include Gopal Tower, Ambalal Complex, Sun Complex, Omkar House, Suryodaya Coplex, Ashish, Lapana Complex, People’s Plaza and Supath. "It is a matter of surprise that despite this position, action has not been taken by the Corporation. In some cases even suits have been dismissed, yet no action is taken," the court observed.

During the course of hearing, counsel for petitioners poionted out to the court that as far as "Doctor House" building near Parimal Crossing was concerned, there was no stay. At this, the court directed the AMC to explain why action has not been taken in this case.

Advocate D.D.Vyas, appearing for the petitioners, pointed out to the court that if a parking lot or nursing home was converted into office, the AMC could have taken action under Section 478 of the Bombay Provincial Municipal Corporations(BPMC) Act. It was then that the court gave the list of eight buildings and directed the AMC to place on record why action was not taken.

The court also directed the AMC to place in court files pertaining to "Urvashi" building, which was constructed before the 1994 resolution, flouting the building by-laws. In this case, the AMC had regularised the construction by charging conversion fee under the 1994 resolution, even though the AMC had won the case in the apex court, and had earlier filed affidavits denying regularisation of the building.

Additional advocate general S.N.Shelat and Prashant Desai appeared for the AMC. Further hearing is fixed on Septemeber 14.

Republished from Indian Express