[Resolved]  M. C. D — Interest of public , justice and Govt Revenue

Address:

Delhi

Subect= Contempt of Delhi High and Supreme court, Infringement of Fundamental rights, Revenue loss’s in 1000 crore’s to center and state government, sheer harassment to public , making policy’s contrary to fundamental right , bylaws and court orders and Direction in order in order to harass people and in order to get wrong full gains and Criminal act under I.P.C 166,167,418 , 120 B and other provision of law Against M.C.D officers, In the Office of Additional Commission ( Engineering )R.k Srivastava and Its below officers
Respected Sir
This is inform /complaint to you M.C.D Officers are Disobeying Direction and Orders of Delhi High court n Supreme court which also amount to contempt of Court, and is infringing fundamental right of people , and also giving Revenue losses to Govt of Delhi and center government as they are making a new policy contrary of FLOOR WISE SANCTION AND REGULARIZATION which is contrary to fundamental rights , bylaws and court orders and Direction in order to harass people and in order to get wrong full gain which is also a criminal act in the following way:-
Sir Circular No.PSO/CO-172/2006 Dt 05/12/2006 was issued By Commissioner of M.C.D Mr.Ashok Kumar (ANX 1 ) in which all officers concerned working in the building department at head quarters and at zonal level to take a note of Judgment delivered by the Honble High Court so that unnecessary litigation to this count could be avoid as what was held by the Hon’ble Courts became a law :-
It was held “Once the property is segregated into different portions and mutated accordingly, there cannot be any requirement of all the co-owners to sign the building plans. If the plot and the building are both co-owned, then only the requirement for such co-owners to sign may at all arise. The segregation of interest of the different co-owners is recognized by the respondent Corporation by mutation of the different portions in individual names of different persons. The fate of an individual owner cannot be dependent on the pen of persons, who happens to the owner of a different portion of the building. Thus, there cannot be any requirement of signatures of all the co-owners.”
More over the first 2nd line of the judgment By Devision bench Delhi High court Honble Chief Justice Madan B Lokur J, L.P.A 2008/2005. “The appeal is an example of how a citizen can be compelled to litigate due to sheer harassment by officers of the State “
The Honble courts when in to all details to give the above said judgment
Even in the judgment W.P Civil no 3280/2004 ) (Copy attached ) it was observed by the Judge para no 13 sub point 1 ,
“There can be more than one owner , in respect of property; it also includes a group of individuals , any person , in order to be called an owner must be one in whose favor the property stands in the municipal records . Therefore, If in respect of a floor, or a flat/unit in a building, there is only one person whose name figures in the municipal records, he is deemed to be the owner “
In Para No 16 ”Apart from such criteria being arbitrary, it might also amount to depriving meaningful use and enjoyment of property, without authority of law, and thus being violation of ARTICLE 300 A of the CONSTITUTION OF INDIA”
And other finding can be gone thru in the Judgment attached
Even After this Officers of building department of M.C.D tried to harries people by saying get signature’s of all the person in the plot/building for sanction or regulation of one floor which is totally illegal just so that they save there skin, continue there illegal activity, suppress peoples fundamental rights and other rights, misguide them for keeping time for more lucrative works, etc
After this a new policy was formed by the Office of the Additional commissioner ( Eng.) Dt .19/01/2009
This Policy was framed in such a way, That no floor/terrace owner can get sanction or regularized his floor or terrace because the terms in the said policy were very unrealistic and illegal it was made by the building department because they intentionally didn’t wanted to obey the HOBLE COURTS ORDERS AND just wanted to make a policy so there skin is saved and people are harried for there wrongful gains
Sir Again by Direction /Orders of various court The said policy was kept in abeyance Wide Circular No.27/Addl. Comm.Engg/2010 Dated 22/03/2010 Of Additional Commissioner (Engineering) M.C.D Mr.R.K Srivastava
The Second Para of the said circular states “The Cases of Floor Wise sanction or regularization shall be entertained on case to case basis on merit after ensuring the compliance of provision of Building bye laws 1983 , Master plan 2021 , Structural Safety and other Zoning regulation without insisting upon signature of owners of other portion(s) of the property in view of the orders /directions of courts “
Sir even after this the Officers in M.C.D Building department at Zonal Level and Head quarter they don’t even accept the file and even if they accept the file then also don’t sanction the building plan just take out faults in floor wise sanction and regularization as is it not lucrative for them etc
But Now even after Circular No.27/Addi.Comm.Egg/2010 Dt 22/03/2010 The Additional Commissioner Officer and there Policy maker’s subordinate officers are Framing a police which is TOTALLY ILLEGAL , CONTRARAY TO LAW ,CONTEMPT OF COURT
which amounts to :-
1) Contempt Of Honble High Court and Supreme Court
2) Infringement of Fundament and Constitutional Right of people
3) Depriving meaningful use and enjoyment of property being violation of Article 300-A of the Constitution of India
4) Harassing people so they get wrongful gains
5) Giving Delhi, Center government and M.C.D it self revenue losses of Rs.[protected]/(TEN THOUSAND CRORE) more or less at least by:-
a) If there is Floor wise sanction or regularization is done then the people whose property is sanctioned or regularized they have to Deposit Regulation fees and addition F.A.R Fees which comes into lacks of Rupees , For In example there are 5,00,000 Floor owner who wants to construct 2nd floor or 3rd floor on there terrace they apply for building plan or regularization for each application the sanction fee/ Addition F.A.R Fee would come uptoRs.10,000,00( Ten lacks ) or Rs.15,000,00 (Fifteen lacks) on a lower side if we take a average Of Rs.2,00,000/- Two lacks only per application
Then for argument sake Government of Delhi , Center and M.C.D it self is loosening about 200000*500000=Rs.[protected]/- (Rupees ten thousand crore ) THAT IS A HUGE REVENUE LOSS JUST BECAUSE OF FEW BUILDING DEPARTMENT OFFICER /OTHER OFFICER WHO ARE MAKING THIS NEW POLICY FOR FLOOR WISE SANCTION AND REGULARIZETION WHO DON’T WANT TO WORK IT IS NOT FEASIBLE
b) Every floor which could be constructed after floor wise sanction that would also give government Taxes of various kind
6) If Floor wise sanction is done, which is allowed by law and also upheld by Hon’ble Delhi High Court and Supreme Court then that would also Generate Direct and Indirect employment
7) It would also help in the housing Problem of Delhi, as The government has already increase the F.A.R. and Dwelling Units then it is saturate that a Terrace owner /Floor Owner can Construct his house in a approved plotted colony after getting building plans sanctioned which the said building department of M.C.D is not doing and is going against the law’s and merits
8) The SAID new policy which IS STILL BEING FRAMED by M.C.D is contrary to the law which is practiced in Delhi The Transfer of Property Act 1887, from which a sale-deed is executed and then the mutating of floor /terrace is done in M.C.D records and then the person get all Right title and interest transferred in the said property including construction rights so he has all the right to construct more floor over , M.C.D Building plan sanction is just a byelaw which need to be followed for consumption of F.A.R and if F.A.R is available in the building and M.C.D cannot go against a right of individual ,fundamental right , DELHI HIGH Court observation and findings or people in general
Sir even after all above stated and documented facts THE M.C.D Officer of Building Department and Additional Commissioner (Engineering) is MAKING A New Policy for Floor wise sanction and Regularization WHICH totally Contrary to the Court Directions/Order, Byelaws, General practice, other laws, Fundamental rights, Individual rights, WHICH AMOUNTS TO HUGE REVENUE LOSSES, all the above state point AND EVERY OFFICER SINGING THE SAID POLICY WOULD BE LIABLE FOR CONTEMPT OF COURT’S , PROVISION UNDER CORRUPTION ACT , I.PC, INFRIGHTMENT OF FUNDAMENTAL RIGHT AND INDIVIDIAL RIGHTS AND OTHER LAW
More OVER TO SAVE THERE SKINS they say they have taken the advice of solicitor general, which is nothing but gimmick to make the policy look genuine, coz solicitor general is government counsel he would give advice what the said officer wants and what information they have provided.
Sir I request you in the interest of public, interest of justice, protection of the Fundament right and to see that THAT there is no CONTEMP of Court by the said new policy which is being framed which they clam they have sent to Hon’ble L.G Office and the meeting is due ON 3rd WEEK OF JUNE 2010 for comments and further order:
A) With Imm. Effect Give Direction to M.C.D to stop making the said policy as it is not required as circular no.27/Addl.Comm.Egg/2010 dt.22/03/2010 is self sufficient
B) All Officers at Headquarters and All D.C Should take a note of the above said points, Judgments and Circular No.27/Addl.Comm.Egg/2010 dt.22/03/2010 and Start Sanctioning Floor wise building plan and Regularization plan
C) RESPECTED HON’BLE L.G Shri Tajendra khanna ji , Mr K.S Mehra Commissioner and Addition Commissioner Engineering Should personally take up the matter and see There is NO CONTEMP OF COURT and Disobeying The court order
D) The said new policy should not be notified or come into action as the said policy is contrary to all the above said point /court orders, Direction and laws
E) TO see the said new policy is simple in a form of SELF attested sanction plan or regularization plan which is being practiced in neighboring state like Haryana and U.P for public in general so that they don’t get harassed by M.C.D Officer OR ANY OTHER SIMPLE POLICY
F) ANY OTHER FAVORABLE DIRECTION IN THE INTREST OF JUSTICE AND PUBLIC AT LARGE

THANKING You
Purnima
Mrs.Purnima Uppal &G.G

Email =P.[protected]@minister.com