Mukesh Goel v. State of Uttarakhand

SL. No. Dat e Office Not es, r epor t s, or der s or pr oceedin gs or dir ect ion s an d Regist r ar 's or der w it h Sign at u r es COURT'S OR JUDGE'S ORDERS

WPPIL No.7 of 2023 Hon 'ble Man oj Ku m ar Tiw ar i, A.C.J. Hon 'ble Alok Ku m ar Ver m a, J.

Mr. Jitendra Chaudhary, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. S.S. Chaudhary, Brief Holder for the State of Uttarakhand.

Mr. Ashish Joshi, Advocate for respondent nos.4 & 5.

Mr. D.K. Sharma, Senior Advocate for respondent no.7.

¶2Petitioner has raised the issue of unauthorized construction made by respondent no.7 at Roorkee which, according to him, is in violation of building bye-laws framed by Haridwar Roorkee Development Authority. It is alleged that sanction given to respondent no.7 was only for 4 floors, out of which, ground floor was to be used for parking, first & second floors were to be used for commercial purpose and third floor was to be used for residential purposes, however, respondent no.7 in breach of conditions of sanction has raised a five-storeyed building and ground floor thereof is being used for commercial purposes and, in first & second floor, construction has been raised much beyond permissible limits.

¶3This Court in its order dated

13.11.2024 recorded the undertaking given by Secretary, Haridwar Roorkee Development Authority that he will get the building in question inspected and submit a report, regarding compoundable and non-compoundable portions.

Secretary, Haridwar Roorkee Development Authority has now filed a supplementary counter affidavit. I n paragraph no.3 of the said counter affidavit, the Secretary has

indicated dimensions of the building and has also separately indicated the area, which can be compounded and the area, which cannot be compounded.

¶4Mr. D.K. Sharma, learned Senior Counsel appearing for respondent no.7 submits that his client has submitted a compounding map with his compounding application for regularizing the construction raised in violation of building bye-laws and the Competent Authority be directed to examine the compounding map and to take decision in the matter, as per law.

¶5Mr. Jitendra Chaudhary, learned counsel for the petitioner, however, submits that the unauthorized construction raised by respondent no.7 cannot be compounded, as there is no Rule or Government Order, which permits compounding of unauthorized construction.

¶6Mr. Ashish Joshi, learned counsel appearing for Haridwar Roorkee Development Authority assures the Court that decision on the compounding application/ map submitted by respondent no.7 shall be taken, strictly as per the bye-laws/ relevant Regulations, within a period of three months.

¶7We, accordingly, dispose of this writ petition with a direction to Competent Authority in Haridwar Roorkee Development Authority to take decision on the compounding application/ map, strictly as per law, within a period of three months' from the date of production of certified copy of this order. This order shall not be construed as a positive direction to compound the non-compoundable portions of the building in question.

( Alok Ku m ar Ver m a, J.) ( Man oj Ku m ar Tiw ar i, A.C.J.)

26.12.2024 Arpan ARPAN JAISWAL DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, ou=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND,

2.5.4.20=eabb68a3895e41937c266c23964c0485365445e3a20dddb73 93398f9fe45ba3e, postalCode=263001, st=UTTARAKHAND, serialNumber=060FC17022BEAE3DE215D68D9D454C5109CB9874463 51E4DF04AADAA2C2CEA66, cn=ARPAN JAISWAL Date: 2024.12.26 16:40:20 +05'30'