High Court breaks stalemate between consultant, Chandigarh Admn over building rule restrictions
Asks the parties to urgently resolve the issue and move the project forward
The Punjab and Haryana High Court on Friday stepped in to break the stalemate between the consultant and the Chandigarh Administration over basement-related building rule restrictions affecting its holistic development and expansion plan, asking the parties to urgently resolve the issue and move the project forward.
Taking up the matter, the Bench headed by Chief Justice Sheel Nagu was told that the issue had surfaced regarding compliance with the city’s building regulations, particularly the permissibility and design of a basement or lower-ground floor in the proposed expansion plan.
At the onset, senior standing counsel Amit Jhanji –– appearing for the administration –– submitted that the consultant had held discussions with officials and the matter was being examined, but compliance issues had arisen under the Chandigarh Building Rules, 2017, which did not permit basements to be used as habitable spaces.
“The concern which has surfaced is with regard to the basement. Chandigarh bylaws of 2017 do not permit the basement to be habitable,” Jhanji told the court. The Bench in turn asserted that the chief architect and chief engineer were there in the administrative committee constituted earlier. “Did they raise any objections,” the court questioned.
Jhanji responded by saying the concept plan initially prepared dealt with “broad infrastructure”. “The nitty-gritties with regard to the planning and measurement were to be done. It did contain the basement, but only for –– what our understanding, when we were also having a meeting –– was that it was only for the purpose of parking. It was never stated that the basement was to be made habitable,” he submitted, adding that the administrative committee constituted could deliberate on the issue and explore a workable solution.
The court was also informed that the building rules contained a power of relaxation vested in the Chief Administrator. Dictating the order in the court, the Bench observed: “It was brought to the notice of this court that there are some issues between the consultant and the UT Administration as regards the height and depth of the basement/lower ground floor and certain building guidelines prevalent in Chandigarh.”
The Bench said it expected the authorities and the consultant to jointly resolve the impasse quickly so that the court complex expansion could proceed without obstruction. “We would like the parties to again sit and discuss and resolve the stalemate at the earliest… We are hopeful that the issue shall be resolved by the UT Administration with the ultimate object of taking ahead the holistic plan matter as expeditiously as possible,” the court said. The matter has been listed for Wednesday.
The directions came during hearing of petitions filed in public interest against the Union of India and other respondents by Vinod Dhatterwal and others petitioners. The High Court has repeatedly flagged the crippling impact of infrastructure shortages. Despite a sanctioned strength of 85 judges, only 69 courtrooms are functional. “This dissuades the High Court from working at full strength,” Chief Justice Nagu had earlier observed, urging the administration “to take a pragmatic view and allow the High Court to expand in terms of infrastructure by giving approval to the holistic plan, be it restrictively”.
