RE:Sealing must go on without hindrance: SC
by Suh P on Apr 11, 2007 01:29 PM Permalink
yes, but some-one should prove it. are you ready to prove it? Supreme Court can act only on factual evidences.
Why do the courts, the monitoring committee not check the lease / rent deeds of the residential premises being used for commercial purposes. All such deeds clearly mention that the premises have been let for residential purposes and any misuse shall be the responsibility of the tenant. this document should be enough to stop the misuse
yes - the sealing must go on, because the decision taken and petition filed was by the government since they need the prime land and heart of city to be clear of common man, offices, vehicles, etc. for VVVVVVVIIIIIPPPPP status and movement. once everything is clear, they will come out with a new development plan for those area and invest in it to reap crores of rupees... hail politicians, hail dhilli government.
What was police and municipal corporation was doing when such a huge number unauthorized work was undergoing ? Had they taken firm stand at that time . the situation would not have risen so dilemma-tic..... Now they have to obey SC ruling.... And if still they delay it... then they should be punished in appropriate manner.....
RE:why to give birth to unauthorized work at all ?
by Anusha R on Apr 11, 2007 12:19 PM Permalink
for every unauthorised structure the local area corporator (up MP-minister) had his cut and hence the Police or administration could not do anything. Now, the governement locked horns with the SC, they have no alternate but to go by the law of the land.
It is good that the supreme court is taking a rigid stand on un-authorised constructions.There should be no murmur from any quarter since the occupiers knew that it is illegal. However, the court must also severly punish the Govt.officials who allowed the structures to come up and then allowed it to function as commercial outlets. Such commercial establishments are also coming up in residential areas in other cities where local governments dont care and allow them to function. Can the Supreme Court also issue an order restraining such activtities in other cities as well.
RE:the law must be obeyed
by PURUSHOTTAM KULKARNI on Apr 11, 2007 12:07 PM Permalink
SUPREME COURT'S COMMANDS ARE NOT TO BE OBEYED AND OFICIALS WHO ALLOWED THIS ARE SURELY TO BE PUNISHED. EVERYWHERE IN ALMOST ALL CITIES IN INDIA CRIMINAL NEXUS EXISISTS BETWEEN CORPORATORS,CORRUPT MUNICIPAL OFFICIALS AND BUILDERS. BUT ONE THING CAN NOT BE UNDERSTOOD IS THAT WHY THERE SHOULD NOT BE SHOPS IN RESIDENTIAL ARAEAS?IF THEY SERVE THE PEOPLE OF THE AREA THEN WHAT IS THE PROBLEM? I REMEBER WHEN I WAS IN DELHI ON A OCCASSION AND HAPPEN TO STAY IN HOTEL ASHOKA YATRI WHICH IS NEAR JANTAR MANTAR I FOUND THERE IS NOT A SHOP TO HAVE EVEN THE ESSENTIALS. ONE HAD TO GO TO CANNOUGHT PLACE ALL THE WAY.MAY BE DELHI BEING CAPITAL OF INDIA THIS RULE WAS FORMED.WE ARE NOT IN USA WHERE EVERBODY GOES TO MALL AND PURCHASES THERE. WE ARE INDIANS AND WE LIKE SHOPS SELLING DIFFERENT THINGS IN THE NEIGHBOURHOOD.IN MUMBAI FOR EXAMPLE YOU WILL FIND ALL YOU REQUIRE WITHIN YOUR VICINITY RIGHT FROM BARBER TO SWEET SHOP TO PANWALLAH AND WHAT NOT. -P.D.KULKARNI
RE:the law must be obeyed
by Comman Man on Apr 11, 2007 12:13 PM Permalink
The other side would be of using residential premises for commercial purpose.... which is not allowed anywhere in India and abroad as well.....This might be the cause of such rule in delhi .... but if rule is then one can't be exempted from that.... Then the rule should not be there at all....
