IN THE MONITORING COMMITTEE AT NEW DELHI
India Habitat Centre, 6-A, Lobby Office
India Habitat Centre, Lodhi Road,
New Delhi -110003
sir
k.j. Rao
That owners of G-24 south extention part-I New Delhi during the pendency of the case said suit property had been demolished and carried out the construction in property in question with the help of Junior Engineer and Zonal Engineer (z.e) of building department (central zone) despite of complete knowledge of case pending before this Hon’ble Court and complaint lodge by the Complainant, the MCD concerned officer did not try hard to stop the unauthorized construction and even defendants (m/s fairdeal) no.1 to 4 dig basement under suit premises as well as changed the existing structure of the suit property . without approved and proper sanction plan.
The Respondents raising illegal construction without obtaining any sanction plan is liable to be demolished and Respondents /builder should face regular prosecution under D.M.C Act. Respondents 1to 4 who connived with area official MCD (ZE) (j.e building central zone) E.E (b) who let owners convert the building residential to commercial on first floor second floor along with digging the basement in the buildings . and let owners to repossess the illegal building have been allowed commercial user in violation of the sanctioned plan use without following due process of law but for the connivance on the part of the enforcement machinery for wrongful gain these violations could not have taken place.
F. That modes appends of the officials of MCD is that they book the building at initial stage the order dated 13.12.2010 vide No.505/B/UC/C2/10 in respect to property bearing No. G-24, South Extension Part -1, New Delhi and show cause notice dated 13.1.2011 vide no’s/904/EE (B)/CZ/11 passed by area officials Copy of the said order is annexed as Annexure ‘A’. for eye wash and save their skin but thereafter no action initiated with the intention to let complete the illegal construction get old and occupied the occupier with their wrongful gains. Even FIR had not been filed by said area mcd officials against the land lord till now.
G.
That the order dt13/12 and order dt13/01 have not been challenged by Mr. Vijay Kumar Kheiterpal and Naresh Dhawan same has been attained finality therefore building in question was liable to demolished in accordance with law and policy of the MCD but area ZE and Asstt. Engineer (building) are let them get possession for their wrongful gain, same act was done by the area officials when Mr. Vijay Kumar digging the full basement, notice was also issued on 8.8. but MCD officials failed to initiate any action and owner was succeeds in their ill-design / motive.
That the official MCD while working as Z.E (B) J.E (B) EE (B) was duty bound to get stopped/demolished the unauthorized MCD on account of dereliction of duty who was posted in the zone is responsible for not taking action as per the provisions of DMC Act with malafide intention which establishes their connivance with the owner/builder. and this tantamount to admission of their guilt. Commissioner by invoking the provisions of Sect. 95 (2) (b) read with Regulation 9 (ii) of the DMC Services (Control & Appeal) Regulations, 1959 and the provisions contained in Article 311 of the Constitution of India has inflicted the penalty of dismissal from services which shall ordinarily be a disqualification for future employment upon the area officials a (Z.E) and (J.E), EE (B). the image of Municipal Corporation of Delhi in the eyes of public has been tarnished and as such they are not worthy to be retained in municipal service any more.
0 comments