Building violations may not see stern actions

Confusion prevails over the terms of reference of the Justice S.Mohan Committee constituted to review the Town and County Planning Act. This committee was constituted through a government order issued on June 1 2007. The order broadly states that the committee will review the Town and Country Planning Act and recommend amendments to it. However, statements made by the Government indicate that the committee will review the regularisation schemes, in particular the High Court order passed to that effect. The Government order is silent on this and carries no specific terms of reference for the committee. The Government sources inform that the opinion of a retired Supreme Court judge has been obtained on the High Court order that upheld the building regularisation scheme of 1999 and rejected subsequent schemes brought in 20 00, 2001 and 2002. The legal opinion so received favours the Government filing a review petition, the sources say. A note on Section 113 of the Town and Country Planning Act, which empowers government to regularise or exempt any building from any rules of the Act, has also been circulated to committee. The amendment to section 113 is under active consideration. The opinion that is gaining ground in the Government is that it has the powers to amend the Town and Country Planning Act and regularize building violations. Attempts are made to go soft on demolition, instead levy a compounding fee. In 1998, the Citizen consumer and civic Action Group (CAG) filed a case in the Supreme Court challenging the existence and amendment of the section 113a of the Town and Country Planning Act. The Supreme Court ruled in 2000 that the government has the powers to amend sec 113 but the manner in which it was made and the frequent changes to the Act were found detrimental to the city. It allowed the regularisation scheme brought through section 113a of the Act as a one-time measure.