DT
PT
Subscribe To Print Edition About The Tribune Code Of Ethics Download App Careers Advertise with us Classifieds
GenZ Speak Up !
search-icon-img
search-icon-img
Advertisement

Stilt+4: Haryana likely to challenge High Court's stay in Supreme Court

  • fb
  • twitter
  • whatsapp
  • whatsapp
featured-img featured-img
Hundreds of applications for stilt+4 floors are pending in Haryana. Representational photo
Advertisement
As hundreds of applications for stilt+4 floors are pending across the state, the Haryana Government may file a Special Leave Petition (SLP) before the Supreme Court against the Punjab and Haryana High Court’s interim order of stay on the policy for residential plots.
Advertisement

Sources said the state’s Town and Country Planning Department (TCPD) has decided to approach the apex court against the April 2 order of the High Court (HC), though final approval is awaited from the CM.

Advertisement

In its order, in ‘Sunil Singh vs State of Haryana and Others’, the HC had observed that a bare perusal of the report of the Expert Committee, headed by retired IAS officer P Raghavendra Rao, which was formed to look into the issue, revealed that in the absence of any infrastructural back-up, “any permission to increase the number of floors would lead to additional burden over the existing infrastructure of the city of Gurugram, which is on the verge of crumbling with increased use by a larger population (residing on the 4th floor) without adequate available infrastructural capacity.”

Advertisement

The order further commented, “It appears that the State of Haryana, merely to earn more revenue, has put the safety and security of members of the general public at stake. State and its functionaries turning a Nelson’s eye towards the desperate shortage of infrastructural requirements in Gurugram city have given a go-by to the all-important aspect of conducting ‘infrastructure capacity audit’ before implementing the stilt+4 policy”, and added that “the state has abdicated its constitutional duty of ensuring a clean and healthy urban environment for the citizens of Gurugram.”

Sources in the TCPD said they wanted to defend their policy and continuation of the stay would make the prices of plots fall, resulting in losses during auctions.

Advertisement

Anti-encroachment drives

Following the stay, on April 16, ACS (TCPD) Anurag Agarwal wrote to all urban local bodies, Haryana Shehri Vikas Pradhikaran (HSVP), Metropolitan Development Authorities of Gurugram, Faridabad, Sonepat, and Panchkula, and Director, TCPD, “to get the encroachment on Right of Way (RoW) of roads in the form of construction of green areas/ lawns/ landscaped areas/ boundary walls etc. removed immediately,” and “to take immediate action against all violators who have indulged in unauthorised use/occupation/ construction in stilt floors in residential plots.”

After the directions, the TCPD reclaimed 216 km of road length across Gurugram’s elite neighbourhoods. In Faridabad, the enforcement wing cleared nearly 150 km of ‘right of way’ in Surajkund and Greater Faridabad.

Registration of independent floors

As per the government’s submission in the Assembly, the registration of three independent floors in residential plots gained pace in Haryana around 2009, when a policy was framed.

As four-floor registration in Delhi grew in popularity, demand for similar policies in Haryana's towns also rose. Between 2017 and 2018, the demand intensified for the registration of four floors. According to the government, a policy decision was taken on November 21, 2018, to allow the registration of four floors on residential plots. It was applied statewide, and all residential plots were covered.

On February 22, 2023, the policy of allowing stilt+4 floors was put on hold after protests across cities. A four-member expert committee was formed, which put certain conditions.

Following that, the government issued a policy on July 2, 2024, under which plot owners whose layout plans originally allowed for three floors, and who had access to residential plots via 10-m-wide or wider roads, were eligible. Owners were required to submit an NOC from adjoining plot owners.

Read what others can’t with The Tribune Premium

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
tlbr_img1 Classifieds tlbr_img2 Videos tlbr_img3 Premium tlbr_img4 E-Paper tlbr_img5 Shorts