Encroachments continue at Sector-11 market; 4 SCOs resumed in six months | chandigarh | Hindustan Times
Today in New Delhi, India
Dec 03, 2016-Saturday
-°C
New Delhi
  • Humidity
    -
  • Wind
    -

Encroachments continue at Sector-11 market; 4 SCOs resumed in six months

chandigarh Updated: Dec 25, 2013 19:21 IST
Bhartesh Singh Thakur
Bhartesh Singh Thakur
Hindustan Times
Highlight Story

As many as four shop-cum-offices (SCOs) have been resumed in the Sector-11 market through the district courts over the past six months due to encroachments at their backside. The latest resumption is of the market committee president, SK Gulati.


Shop owners allegedly put tin sheds at the back of the showrooms and give them on rent and earn profit.
"In the recent past, four SCOs belonging to Gulati, Rakesh Budhiraja, RL Malhotra and Hans Raj Chabra were resumed for unauthorised constructions at the back of showrooms. Majority of showrooms in the market have similar encroachments which will be resumed too in the future after a survey," said Ashwani Chaudhary, counsel for the Haryana Urban Development Authority (HUDA).

The showroom was allotted to Gulati in 1986 and possession letter was issued in 1988. A motor garage is operating at the back of their showroom, Khan Motors.

Most of the shop owners who lost their cases in the court had taken the plea that HUDA could not resume their plots under section 17 of HUDA Act and it could not only demolish them under section 55 of the Act and that too in a time prescribed under the HUDA Act which is six months. But the court rejected the contention.
"If HUDA had not acted in six months' prescribed time then it does not mean people would create anarchy.

That is why we have acted under section 17 of the Act," clarified Chaudhary.

The court also rejected the contentions of allottees that the unauthorised constructions were raised by their tenants on the ground that tenant was inducted by allottees and HUDA never gave consent for a "violator tenant".

On the objections that others too in the market had raised similar constructions at the back of their showroom, the court of civil judge Amit Verma said violations by one did not give right to others to commit similar violations and "two wrongs does not make one right."