The Gujarat High Court on Friday got here down closely on the state authorities over the difficulty of fireside NOC and Building Use permission, stating that the federal government had not taken any motion towards officers concerned in permitting unlawful development after which allowing such buildings to operate with out fireplace NOCs.
The High Court bench comprising Justices Bela Trivedi and Bhargav D Karia gave the Gujarat authorities and Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation 4 weeks’ time to provide you with a “concrete plan” to handle the difficulty of non-compliance of guidelines relating to fireplace no objection certificates and Building Use permission.
“Enough is enough. It is time for action. You need to come up with a concrete action plan with a time schedule,” the bench mentioned, whereas listening to a set of petitions relating to fireplace security situation within the cities.
While Advocate General Kamal Trivedi urged the bench to take up solely the hearth NOC subject in the meanwhile and to not contact the “larger” matter of Building Use permission, the bench insisted on addressing each points concurrently, because the judges felt they’re interconnected and can’t be separated.
“Why no action was taken against concerned officers, with whose connivance or blessings these illegal constructions went on and such buildings continue to be occupied without a fire NOC?” the bench requested.
When the Advocate General mentioned notices had been issued to those that wouldn’t have fireplace NOCs for his or her buildings, the bench famous that the federal government “wakes up and starts taking action” solely after the court docket intervenes.
“For years together, no action was taken against wrongdoers or officers who did not take action against wrongdoers. Nothing happens. Every time you come up with such excuses and nothing is happening,” Justice Bela Trivedi mentioned.
At one level, when the court docket insisted that the federal government also needs to provoke motion towards those that didn’t purchase Building Use permission, the Advocate General urged the court docket to handle that subject afterwards, as he claimed that the one possibility left with the federal government in such situation can be to demolish unlawful buildings and that may create “commotion”.
When the Advocate General mentioned the Building Use permission subject is a “complicated one” and buildings additionally come up “overnight”, Justice Karia refused to purchase the argument saying “the claim is not digestible”.
While addressing the Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation lawyer Mihir Joshi, who was additionally of the opinion that solely fireplace NOC subject must be addressed for now, Justice Karia mentioned, “Nothing will happen for another 20 years if we go by that argument. Something drastic has to be done now.” The bench was of the opinion that giving fireplace NOC to a constructing, which doesn’t have a Building Use permission, is akin to permitting unlawful use of a constructing by separating two points.
Mr Joshi mentioned if a fireplace NOC is withheld for the need of Building Use permission, it’s going to result in larger problems.
The bench didn’t give in to the argument saying “in the garb of safety, you will give fire NOC to those who do not have BU permission. So, we can’t bifurcate the two issues. It has to be taken up together”.
(This story has not been edited by NDTV workers and is auto-generated from a syndicated feed.)