E-Paper
Revocation of occupation certificates of Berkeley Square: HC asks Chandigarh admn why order should not be stayed
Interestingly, the UT’s move had come a day before a meeting of the Supreme Court (SC)-appointed Central Empowered Committee (CEC) on July 18 during which the green watchdog had directed the administration to take action against Berkeley Square and another complex in Industrial Area, Godrej Eternia, for operating without wildlife clearance.
The Punjab and Haryana high court (HC) has asked Chandigarh administration why its July 17 order of revoking the occupation certificate of Berkeley Square, a commercial complex in city’s Industrial Area, should not be stayed.
Interestingly, the UT’s move had come a day before a meeting of the Supreme Court (SC)-appointed Central Empowered Committee (CEC) on July 18 during which the green watchdog had directed the administration to take action against Berkeley Square and another complex in Industrial Area, Godrej Eternia, for operating without wildlife clearance. The projects reportedly fall within the 10 km radius of the Sukhna Wildlife Sanctuary and the City Bird Sanctuary in Sector 21, and thus are eco-sensitive zones.
On Tuesday, taking up a plea from RSA Motors Pvt Ltd, which owns M/s Berkeley Square, the bench of justice Arun Palli and justice Vikram Aggarwal issued notice to the UT administration, seeking its response by August 21.
As per the firm’s statement in the HC, over 50 business houses are running their offices in the multi-tower complex, built on five acres, and an environmental clearance was granted to it in 2015.
The petitioner alleged that the UT administration and environment authorities had issued multiple notices in a short span on various grounds.
The firm, promoted by Ranjeev Dahuja, had obtained the environment clearance certificate on January 23, 2015, before the grant of occupation certificate on April 22, 2016. As far as the wildlife permission is concerned, the firm submitted the application in 2014, their counsel Chetan Mittal told the court. He added that in 2017, two notifications, in respect of Sukhna Wildlife and City Bird Sanctuary, were issued by the Ministry of Environment and Forests, stating that their premises do not require any permission.
The court was informed that State Environment Impact Assessment Authority (SEIAA) instituted a complaint against the petitioner because of the construction being carried out prior to obtaining the permission and that complaint has already been stayed by the HC in another case. All other violations which have been alleged are either compoundable and the ones which are non-compoundable have been removed, Mittal informed the court, arguing that the UT estate officer has exceeded its jurisdiction while revoking the occupation certificate on the ground of misrepresentation.
The court was informed that earlier also UT had revoked environment clearance and when the matter reached Supreme Court, it came down heavily on the administration and directed to de-seal the premises within 36 hours.
