COMMENTS

I have said this before, & I say it again....

Building violations must never be 'regularized' - Not legally, Not ethically, Not morally, Not conscientously, Never !

Courts would never permit such regularization since they are "violations".

The only solution to this is to charge higher property taxes for such buildings as long as they remain in violation. Once such building violations are rectified, taxes can be reverted back & made normal - this is the best way ahead since immediate rectification might not be possible by most such building owners.

Govt & BBMP are barking up the wrong tree by imagining that the problem will get sorted out after collecting fines & "regularizing" them. On the contrary, they are actually inviting the whole city to violate bye-laws & all new buildings will be prepared to pay such "fine" & build more than permitted by bye-laws.

• thumb_up 34 Likes
• · login or register to post comments

Any idea who all have taken this issue ( sakrama ..) to court ? Carlton Tower fire / Park street fire .. are some cases. You need some strategy on what ground to offer resistance ( court cases need series of arguements - each point you raise can be knocked off by the other side. You need a legal mind..with Chess players foresight )

Take Carlton Tower.. Some extra additional rooms were made ( media report ). Built Up Area includes floor + Walls (formula). After additions BUA should have gone up (fr date of alteration ). 

sample case - get Prop Tax paid over last 20yrs under RTI for this bldg and you have a puzzle. On one hand papers say extra office was built . On the other hand you have Prop Tax paid figures RTI.  Do they match ?

Beauty of Prop Tax SAS is you pay once and just show old recpt and pay for life ( Extra BUA can be forgotten )

High Property Taxes till bldgs remain in violation is one way. What ever you may think Urban Min may push  the issue for some other reason

Can they do that ? They are all part of the govt. State need the money

 .

• thumb_up 47 Likes
• · login or register to post comments

Everyone knows Sakrama is a lousy rule..even the Law Minister agrees that its not correct!

 But gives a very unconvincing reason for going ahead with Sakarama.."we also need to consider the fact that the city needs more funds with growing infrastructure needs"

What are the budgets for? If low on funds, raise legit loans and repay them!

Just because there is news of Sakrama...people of this city are violating all possible rules around construction..its very visible everywhere..from small houses to big complexes!

Shame on them! Shame on us!

Unfortunately here, one is taught how to break or bend all rules than abide by them! Very unfortunate!

• thumb_up 49 Likes
• · login or register to post comments

A violation is a violation. The owner better pay up a fine imposed every year, on a growing scale, until the violation is corrected. Sakrama just encourages more violations and more such schemes in future, while the city breaks apart.

But I'm sure our greedy society (rulers and the ruled included) will find ingenious ways to violate any rule imposing such a fine itself! :) 

• thumb_up 47 Likes
• · login or register to post comments

Hi All

we should be fine not regularizing the building violations which were in BDA /BMRDA/BMP limits.

Now after formation of BBMP more villages that were part of Gram panchyat have come under BBMP people who have purchased sites or building with a  permission of gram needs to regularized .

layouts in these area donot have BBMP khata nor premission . As of now BBMP is not giving khata in these layouts what should people in these layouts do .

Now banks are not funding gram panchyat approved layouts nor BBMP is giving permission to build house in these layouts .

BBMP says we need to wait till sakrama is scheme is implemented so that they collect betterment fees and than give khata

Before objecting i request to think about these people also.

• thumb_up 36 Likes
• · login or register to post comments