Open House: Is Chandigarh Administration justified in proposing 400 times increase in penalty for building violations?

The Administration must be clear about what a violation in a building could actually be. Yes, if a building has encroached on government land or the construction endangers its structural stability as well as that of the adjacent building. The quantum of the penalty has to be realistically justifiable. An increase in the penalty by 400 times as proposed by the UT bureaucrats has not only raised many eyebrows but also protests by a major chunk of the city’s population. The need-based changes carried out by thousands of residents should be regularised by charging a nominal compounding fee, as verbally promised by the then CHB Chairman a long time ago.

SC Luthra, Chandigarh

Increase in penalty by UT Admn is justified

The prices of properties have increased manifold over the years and so are building violations. The violations should be removed within a time frame so that the city qualifies for the Smart City tag, otherwise it will become a smart slum soon. The number of building violations is increasing with each passing day in a major part of the city which must be checked without playing the vote bank politics.

KC Rana, Chandigarh

Penalty amount may be doubled

It is true that there is one or another building violation in every house. These violations are mostly noticed in government houses as well as where high-ranking officials reside. With time, the requirement for covered area has increased much. At the same time, the requirement for open spaces for sleeping and drying clothes has decreased. Residents have resorted to more of unsanctioned constructions which is the need of the hour. So looking into their genuine requirements, there is no justification in increasing the penalty 400 times. In case the Administration goes for it, it will be a making a mockery of itself apart from displeasing the residents.

NPS Sohal, Chandigarh

UT bound to take harsh steps

The proposal of the Administration to hike the penalty amount by 400 times has raised a hue and cry. The Administration is bound to take such a harsh step as violations are increasing day by day. Stringent measures are the need of the hour to discourage violators.

Gobind Ahuja, Chandigarh

Remove violations after issuing warning

Some people have even changed the basic structure of buildings according to their needs, so it becomes necessary for the Administration to either amend the building bylaws or impose a heavy penalty on the violators. If they can spend a huge amount of money on buildings and intentionally violate bylaws, then they shouldn’t mind paying the penalty. If the Administration feels that the violations have been carried out to misuse the premises, it should give the owner a warning. If he or she doesn’t remove it, then the Administration should dismantle those structures.

Sukhwant Bhullar, Chandigarh

Imposing penalty no solution

Imposing heavy penalties is no solution to the problem of building bylaw violations. Rather need-based changes should be regularised keeping in view the increasing size of families. FAR should be increased to have more space to meet need-based requirements, provided they are structurally safe as per building bylaws. Views of RWAs, FOSWAC and other social organisations must be taken before finalising the proposal of increasing the penalty up to Rs. 2 lakh, which seems very harsh for the common man.

Col TBS Bedi (retd), Mohali

Make provision for other penal action

In no way such a big increase in the penalty is justified, but these type of offences deserve a heavy fine. It is advisable that the Administration must have provision for other penal action such as imprisonment instead of increasing the fine amount so much. It will make resident think twice before breaking the rules and the administration will be saved the embarrassment of unjustified increase of the fine amount.

Bir Devinder Singh Bedi, Chandigarh

Hike in penalty must be withdrawn

Caution is the eldest child of wisdom. Genuine suggestions should be taken into consideration to amend the Capital of Punjab Act. The Administration has taken a stringent step by increasing the penalty for building bylaw violations and the misuse of premises. On the other hand, corruption will be increased with this heavy increase in the penalty rates. It is never too late to mend. Meetings should be held among the authorities, industrialists, traders and RWAs. The Administration must allow need-based changes and define violations/misuse. The hike must be withdrawn to quell the agitation.

Sumesh Kumar Badhwar, Mohali

Such an increase in the fine is unfair

The UT Administration’s proposal of increasing the penalty up to Rs. 2 lakh is absolutely unfair. It should increase the fine by some thousands. The building allottees be cautious regarding authorised amendments so that they do not invite any fine.

MR Bhateja, Nayagaon

Formulate concrete, elaborate system

The decision of the Chandigarh Administration to impose a hefty penalty on defaulters cannot be justified at all. The amendment to the Act to impose more penalty cannot set the system right. Can the alterations made be set right by imposing a fine? The Administration either stop accepting any act of alteration or streamline the system with detailed guidelines. The basic structure of the City Beautiful cannot be kept intact by increasing the penalty. The Administration must justify both, the requirement of alteration and the imposition of penalty, to set it right without compromising the beauty and structure of the City Beautiful.

Wg Cdr JS Minhas (retd), Mohali

Hike to hit senior citizens, traders hard

The proposed hike by the Administration in the penalty is not justified at all. The city has a sizable number of senior citizens who are surviving on pension in this inflation-hit world. This penalty hike on building violations will directly hit them. The traders and small industrialists are already against this move as they observe the Administration is increasing the penalty year after year. The Administration is on the track to making a profit from the city residents through various means.

Sunny Dhaliwal, Chandigarh

Easy penalties are generally ignored

Penalties are one of the common ways to bring about development under regulations. But easy penalties are generally ignored by people and this results in a haphazard development. The Chandigarh Administration intends to increase the penalty amount for building violations by 400 times, but this cannot be afforded by all in society. The penalties should vary according to the plot size.

Adite Dhadwal, Chandigarh

Admn proposal not justified

The Administration has proposed an amendment to the Capital of Punjab (Development and Regulation) Act, whereby it intends to increase the penalty for building bylaw violations and misuse of premises from Rs. 500 to Rs. 2 lakh. The Administration is not justified in proposing nearly 400 times increase in the penalty. If there is a need to increase the penalty, then it should be reasonable. Any unreasonable increase in the penalty amounts to an arbitrary step of the authorities concerned.

Adish Sood, Amloh

Penalties will keep a check on violations

Increasing the penalty is indeed a very progressive and stringent step towards dealing with unauthorised constructions. Such constructions cause a displeasing burden on the city’s ecosystem and result in excessive use of resources. Which already is a challenge for the Administration. The only thing that has to be kept under surveillance is the implementation of this step as per plans and giving no room to corruption.

Chetan Verma, Chandigarh

It was expected after central benefits

After central benefits to the employees of Chandigarh, it was expected that the Administration will have to generate more revenue to meet financial requirements. But the proposed increase in the penalty for building misuse is hefty and it would prove costly to residents. A reasonable increase in revenue from the existing resources is always welcome, provided it is used for the development of the city and attracts FDIs. This will help in bringing about an integrated development of the tricity and creating more jobs for the youth.

Col BS Mathauda (retd), Chandigarh

Hefty penalties an effective tool

Actually, hefty penalties are an effective tool to ensure enforcement of a contractual duty. So the amount of penalty should be excessive. The government has sharply increased penalties for breaking the rules. It is correct as ultimately the high fines will act as a deterrent to the violation of building bylaws.

Anita K Tandon, Kharar

Proposed hike will lead to corruption

It’s the common man who has to run from pillar to post even to get an authentic structure plan passed. In view of this, the proposed hike in the penalty by 400 times is not justified. It will just lead to corruption as to avoid the hefty penalties, the common man will try to find out a “jugaad”. Also. It will lead to the piling up of cases in courts. The Administration should allow need-based alterations in structures to give some relief to residents from time to time.

Savita Kuthiala, Chandigarh

Penalty must be calculated area-wise

Officials have clarified that the quantum of fine will depend on the misused area and ?2 lakh is the maximum amount of penalty that can be imposed. Penalty can be much lower for small violations. Penalty must be calculated area-wise. The smaller the area under violation, the lower the penalty. The Administration should hold talks with all stakeholders. The authorities should promote the genuineness behind the proposal as the increase has been made for the first time after a long time.

Sanjay Chopra, Mohali

Increasing fine is not the only way

A forum of more than 20 associations of traders, industrialists and RWAs have opposed the proposed hike in the penalty. I also feel that it is not justified at all. Increasing fine is not the only way to curb building bylaw violations. Penalty should not be considered as a revenue-generating exercise. The Administration should convene a joint meeting of the representatives of various associations with the officials concerned so that everyone can forth his or her views. Age-old rules and regulations for buildings should be done away with. The Administration should try to find out another way rather than increasing the penalty. The formation of a committee to consider need-based changes is the need of the hour.

Vidya Sagar Garg, Panchkula

Proposal not resident-friendly

The proposed increase in the amount of penalty for violation and misuse of buildings is unjustified. It’s a way of the government to generate more revenue. It is not feasible on the part of the masses. It will be a total harassment for residents. It is not a resident-friendly decision. The UT should charge a nominal fee/fine for the use of a residential property for commercial purposes and for making changes in the building.

Abhilasha Gupta, Mohali

Spare the rod, spoil the child

This penalty is justified as it has rightly been said “you spare the rod and spoil the child”. When there are defaulters and no attention is paid to the laws and regulations, a penalty is the best way to keep a check on violations. People start taking things for granted so it is very justified on the Administration’s part to heavily penalise defaulters

Garv Bhupesh, Panchkula

Penalty hike will lead to litigations

Violations should be divided into two categories – “illegal and unauthorised”. Those not allowed in the Master Plan can be put in the “illegal” category and those allowed but not covered in the approved building plan in the “unauthorised” category. The latter should be allowed as need-based alterations. Cases should be dealt with seriously but the proposed hike in the penalty will lead to time-consuming litigations and both parties losing heavily in legal battles.

Bharat Bhushan Sharma, Chandigarh

A knee-jerk reaction by Administration

The proposal to hike the penalty appears to be a knee-jerk reaction. From the legal point of view, it is justified, but such a huge financial burden is not justified. There is already a demand by residents for regularising changes in a rational and genuine manner. Their regularisation will facilitate a smooth transition to the new requirement of building norms. Need-based changes have come up in around 50,000 flats over the years. The amount of penalty proposed by the UT Administration cannot be of a broad brush type as it may not be accurate or genuine from residents’ point of view.

Dr Anil Kumar Yadav, Chandigarh

It is unwarranted, anti-public

The proposal by the UT Administration to increase the penalty from Rs. 500 up to Rs. 2 lakh, daily fine from Rs. 20 to Rs. 8,000 and the annual increase of 5 per cent for building misuse/violations by amending the Capital of Punjab (Development and Regulation) Act, 1952, is unwarranted and anti-public. Instead of having a deterrent effect, this unreasonable increase would cause palpable arbitrariness and lead to corruption. The amendment needs to be reviewed to reduce the proposed penalty significantly.

RPS Chopra, Chandigarh

Adopt a humanitarian approach on issue

The topography of the city has changed over the years as well as the profile of residents. The city is no longer a pensioners’ city. Due to its geographical placement, the UT has turned into an educational and medical hub. Owing to its proximity to HP, tourist inflow has also increased over the years. With a good quality of life, the population has increased. All these factors are affecting the limited infrastructure, both residential and commercial. The Administration should understand and take a humanitarian approach towards the so-called misuse of premises and building violations.

Dr Rajeev Kumar, Chandigarh

Authorities should instead ‘get real’

Why make a mockery of yourself by toying with such unrealistic and impractical ideas? It may be recalled that Chandigarh Housing Board’s similar moves in respect of various structural changes (conveniently termed as need-based) carried out by owners, had fallen flat and it was later forced to allow the same. Reasonably speaking, the authorities concerned should instead “get real” to avoid a catch-22 situation and eating humble pie should someone take a legal recourse.

Vinayak, Panchkula

Decision a shocker for residents

The reason behind the gross building violations is the ill-conceived policies of the Chandigarh Administration allowing need-based changes in the buildings. The proposal to increase the existing penalty of Rs. 500 up to a whopping Rs. 2 lakh has come as a bolt from the blue. The Administration, instead of increasing the penalty amount astronomically, should mull other measures to curb the violations. The move, instead of reining in violations, would promote these in a big way. The Administration needs to go the hard way against those involved, no matter how high and mighty he or she might be.

Ramesh K Dhiman, Chandigarh

A welcome move, will curb violations

Bringing an amendment to Act and the proposal to hike the penalty up to Rs. 2 lakh is a good step. People fear law when they have to pay hefty penalties. But if the amount is meagre, they violate the rules openly. The will lead to a decrease in violations and at the same time, earn the UT a good amount of revenue in the form of penalty. Penalty revision should be carried out from time to time, so that people don’t have to be burdened with hefty fine after so many decades.

Avinash Goyal, Chandigarh

Withdraw draft proposal immediately

The penalty amount should be calculated on the basis of the area of violation and there should not be a lump sum amount. Hence, this draft proposal should be withdrawn immediately.

SK Khosla, Chandigarh

Constitute board to examine violations

Any structural changes carried out against the bylaws and misuse of property may weaken a structure and can lead to a loss of material and even life. Such hefty increase in the penalty is not justified. A board comprising members from engineering and environmental departments may be constituted to analyse the degree of seriousness of violations and then impose penalty accordingly.

Manjit Singh Johar, Chandigarh

QUESTION

In view of a rise in Covid-19 cases across the country, isn’t it the responsibility of residents to take pre-emptive measures to check the spread of the virus before the Chandigarh Administration steps in and imposes restrictions?

Suggestions in not more than 70 words can be sent to openhouse@tribunemail.com