E-Paper
Sell unsold plots to develop Sunny Enclave infra: High court to Mohali DC
The landmark decision came on a clutch of petitions by home buyers, alleging lack of civic infrastructure development by the developer, Jarnail Singh Bajwa
In a landmark decision, the Punjab and Haryana High Court has mandated the sale of unsold plots belonging to a Mohali-based builder, directing that the proceeds be used for the development of physical infrastructure in the Sunny Enclave area of Kharar, spread in 350 acre of land.
The order was passed by a bench comprising Justice Sureshwar Thakur and Justice Vikas Suri, on a clutch of petitions from New Sunny Enclave Residents Social Welfare Association, other resident welfare associations (RWAs), and individual allottees. The petitioners had alleged a lack of civic infrastructure development by the developer, Jarnail Singh Bajwa.
According to Sameer Sachdeva, a lawyer involved in the case, thousands of allottees were affected as plots were sold but necessary infrastructure such as roads, drainage, electricity lines, and parks, etc, were not developed in the societies and independent residential units spread in 350 acre of land. These localities fall in Sectors 120, 123, 124 and 117 in Jandpur, Manana, Sihampur and Hassnapur villages. The Sunny Enclave project, once touted as the largest in the tricity, was conceptualised and developed over the past 15-20 years.
The HC has directed the Mohali deputy commissioner (DC) to oversee and conduct the auction of the properties within one month.
Furthermore, the chief secretary has been directed to establish a special cell comprising three auditors to assess the pending development works at the sites, prepare cost estimates, and monitor financial expenditures. The Greater Mohali Area Development Authority (GMADA) will be responsible for executing the construction work, with the entire process to be completed within four months.
The court stipulated that any remaining funds after the infrastructure development would be used to settle outstanding government charges owed by the developer, and any surplus thereafter would be released to the developer.
The court did not agree with the argument raised by the developer that buyers can approach RERA with their complaints. “At this stage, (it would be) an extremely elongated remedy (sending buyers to RERA), besides would further enmesh the allottees/homebuyers in an avoidable quagmire of litigation,” the bench observed disposing of the pleas. It also noted that in some works’ cases he had given an undertaking that unexecuted work could be completed by the GMADA in lieu of vacant plots.
The residents’ plea highlighted that over fifteen years had passed without the developer providing essential basic facilities and completing all external and internal development works. They had also sought directives to prevent the authorities from allowing the developer to undertake any new projects until the pending works in Sunny Enclave were completed.
