No applicat ion under Rule 7 shall be considered to be valid until the information re quired by Rules 8.9, 10,11,12, I3 and 14 has been furnished to the satisfaction ofthe Chief Administrator. In tho case of failure of ~uch compliance !hc:: application together with plans shall be returned 10 the applicant for re-submission III uccor dance with tho rules.
.16. Nottce ofcommencement ofwork. - (i) A person whu intends tu erect or recrcct any building shall givc'to tl.e Chicfndministrator not less than a week's notice in writing orthe date and time at which the erection or rc-erection of the ~uilding~hall begin. ' . .
I [(ii) WII\:ilthu cuustructlon work reaches at Plinth level, he shall inform the ChiefAdministrator for inspection ofbuilding at that stage. If the ChiefAdminis uutor neglects or omits 10 inspect aud issue 1I certificate within a pcriod of'[fif teen days (including holidays)] froin the date ofsuch notice, the owner shall con tinue the superstructure in accordance with sanctioned building plan i] I [Provided that if a person does not infonn the ChiefAdministrator for in spection cf building at the stage when the construction work reaches at plinth I~~:I, ho_~~.~:!~~.!~~~~_~~~~~.~~~~!~~~~~~':har~~~~~:~.nl\~~~r::=.._. _ I. S"" f'b. Ca;>:,.' (De... .I< Reg.) B~II11;ng (A"i.lI~m~lII) !<ul"", 1993 (22-1- J9~3)
2. ~.br. vi':" . CItJ. Admn, Gll:i.. Notilicu: ion No. UT.3436-tHI'1(5)·2UUUII05~\I dated J-II-2COO J. ". ~lI l"lI vicle (:1..1. r..:1 :111 . "",. N",mc":'on N.,. ?7110.1 lTl'!(3).971 I I ~(J lIl. 14-2-1997 ;;t l>: S' 1 , I r punj~b Capital (pevclopment a~d Regulation) Building Rules, 1952 51 '(17. Validity of tile sanction plan. - If a building is not completed within '{five ye.us} of the date of sanction, tho sanction will be deemed to have lapsed.]
, COMMENTS Resumption of site - Lessee was to complete building within prescribed periou of'three l ea,s from the dale of'atlotment-: I-Ie could not complete construction with ill th is period - Subsequently, p lot was resumed by the Au thority - Impugned Order cannot be sustained on the following grounds :-
(i) Allottee spent Rs. 51 crores and had obtained a Joan of Rs. 45 crores for completion nf'building, which proves bona fide intention ofthe allottee.
(ii) Authority took 4 V. years in sanctioning the revised plan.
( iii) Auth ority has d iscretionary powers to grant exemption under the Rules.
(iv) All the dues had already been paid by the allottee relating to the plot.
(v) Under section 8A of the Act, resumption of plot is not a mandatory provision for breach otcondutons.
(vi) Allottee was given only II period of II V. months whereas under Rule 16 of 1973 the Jim it is J years.
(vii) Allottee had paid Rs. 3.90 crores as extension fcc.
(viii)As huge structure has already been raised, power ofresumption ought not 10 be exercised though alternative power of penalizing the allottee can be exercised - Mis. James Hotel Ltd. v. Union Teitory; Chadigah, 20 I0(2) Haryana Law eporter 84 0.8.
***