Unauthorised Constructions: HC for stern action against delinquent officials

Srinagar, February 15: The High Court of J&K and Ladakh has ordered a stern action against the authorities in whose tenure unauthorised constructions have come up and deviations or violations of building permission have taken place.

A bench of Justice Vinod Chatterji Koul ordered the action against the officials and officers in keeping with a judgment the Supreme Court has delivered recently wherein the top court has held that unauthorised constructions could not be legitimised merely due to administrative delays, passage of time, or monetary investments.

“It was even said by the Supreme Court that post-construction violations must trigger swift corrective action, including demolition of the illegal part and penalties for erring officials,” the court said.

The bench underscored that the Supreme Court in a catena of decisions has categorically held that the illegality of unauthorised constructions cannot be perpetuated.

The court held that if a construction is made in contravention of the acts or rules, it would be construed as illegal and unauthorised construction, which has to be necessarily demolished.

“It cannot be legitimised or protected solely under the ruse of the passage of time or citing inaction of authorities or by taking recourse to the excuse that substantial money has been spent on the said construction,” it said.

The bench said that in the ultimate analysis, the Supreme Court opined that constructions put up in violation or deviation of the building plan approved by local authority and constructions which are audaciously put up without any building planning approval cannot be encouraged.

While the court pointed out that each and every construction must be made scrupulously following and strictly adhering to the rules, it said: “If any violation is brought to the notice of the courts, it has to be curtailed with iron hands and any lenience afforded would amount to showing misplaced sympathy.”

The bench said that the Supreme Court has also observed that unless the administration is streamlined and the persons entrusted with the implementation of the act are held accountable for their failure to perform their statutory obligations, violations of this nature would go unchecked and become more rampant.

“If the officials are let scot-free, they will be emboldened and would continue to turn Nelson’s eye to all the illegalities resulting in derailment of all planned projects and pollution, disorderly traffic, security risks,” it said.

The bench observed that the top court has held that while issuing the building planning permission, an undertaking be obtained from the builder or applicant, as the case may be, to the effect that possession of the building will be entrusted or handed over to the owners or beneficiaries only after obtaining completion and occupation certificate from the authorities concerned.

“The builder, developer, and owner shall cause to be displayed at the construction site, a copy of the approved plan during the entire period of construction and the authorities concerned shall inspect the premises periodically and maintain a record of such inspection in their official records,” the court said.

It said: “Upon conducting personal inspection and being satisfied that the building is constructed in accordance with the building planning permission given and there is no deviation in such construction in any manner, the completion or occupation certificate in respect of residential or commercial building, be issued by the authority concerned to the parties concerned, without causing undue delay.”

“If any deviation is noticed, action must be taken in accordance with the act and the process of issuance of completion and occupation certificate should be deferred, unless and until the deviations pointed out are completely rectified,” the court said.

They issued the directions while dealing with a case in which, it said, two brothers raised construction in Srinagar in “blatant violation of terms and conditions of building permission and the authorities were required to take stern action against the officials and officers who were at the helm of affairs at the relevant point of time when the violations were committed by the brothers”.