Delhi High Court
Shiv Kumar Sharma vs Dda And Ors. on 26 September, 2002
Author: S K Kaul
Bench: S K Kaul
JUDGMENT
Sanjay Kishan Kaul, J.
1. The petitioners are occupants of flats
constructed in Paschim Vihar in the land of Ashoka CGHS
Limited, a group housing society. The construction of
the dwelling units is stated to have been completed on
27.11.1986 and the allotment was confirmed on
10.3.1987.
2. In May 1999 some public advertisements were
issued and the petitioners claim that the pursuance to
such public advertisements the petitioners have
constructed additional structures and that the same
have not been regularised despite the society
approaching the respondents. The petitioners were
served notices by the DDA on account of this extra
construction and have approached this Court for
quashing of the said notices and for regularisation of
the construction.
3. In the counter affidavit filed by the respondent
DDA, it is stated that the aforesaid constructions are
unauthorised. It is further stated that assuming that
some extra FAR is granted to the society, if within the
compoundable limits, the same can be granted to the
society as a whole and not to individuals allottees.
4. I find force in the submission of the learned
counsel for the respondent DDA that if any extra FAR is
to be granted, it must be granted to the society as a
whole. It is for the members of the society thereafter
to decide whether the extra FIR is to be shared by all
the allottees or has to be utilised by few of the
persons including the petitioners.
5. In view of the aforesaid, it is directed that
the petitioners and the representations of the society
will appear before the Director (Building) of the DDA
on 22nd October, 2002 along with requisite documents.
The said authority will examine the case of the society
and decides whether any extra FAR within the
compoundable limits is permissible. If so, the benefit
to the society will be granted on payment of
compounding fee/other charges. The needful be done
within a period of two months from today. Once the
aforesaid decision is taken, it will be for the society
to decide as to how the extra FAR, if any, is to be
utilised. In case the petitioners have constructed
more than their share and the society does not want to
grant them the benefit of extra FIR beyond their share,
the petitioners shall remove the extra construction to
the excess extent within a period of six weeks
thereafter. The respondent authority shall thereafter
within two weeks carry out an inspection of the
construction of the society to ensure that it conforms
to the construction permissible within the sanctioned
limited including the compoundable deviations.
6. In case the petitioners conforms to the
aforesaid, no action shall be taken against them in
terms of the impugned notice. However, on the failure
of the petitioners and society to do the needful, it is
open to the respondents to proceed in pursuance to the
impugned notice.
7. Writ petition stands disposed of in the aforesaid terms.
C.M.No. 11126/2001
8. No further orders are called for in this
application in view of the disposal of the writ
petition.
9. Application stands disposed of.
10. dusty to learned counsel for the parties.
