COMMENTS

The text of the circular reads as below:

Many citizens complain regarding illegal constructions and construction in violation of sanctioned plan. These involve not leaving sufficient setback on all sides, constructing additional floors without plan sanction, not leaving parking space etc.
A comprehensive circular has been issued on 7/8/2015 http://bbmp.gov.in/…/C…/fd545cf2-4b44-4470-9633-eb825d39b831
giving instructions to the concerned AE, AEE on the action to be taken in such cases.
This involves three types of action
1. Action under Sec 321 of the KMC Act directing the owner to stop construction in case of violation, and for demolition in case he continues with the unauthorised deviation or construction.
2. Writing to BESCOM and to BWSSB to disconnect electricity and water supply and not to give permanent connections.
3. Warning the concerned BBMP registered Architect, Engineer and Supervisor to advise the building owner to remove about the plan violation. In case they fail to stop then further action would be taken against the Architect, Engineer and Supervisor as per Building Bye Law IV-7.1 to cancel their registration.
Citizens can lodge their complaint with 22660000 or bbmp.sahaaya.in and also request the jurisdictional AE and AEEs to take action in such cases as per Circular dated 7/8/15.
They can escalate their complaint to the higher officers in case of inaction.
bbmp.gov.in
 
The question that arises is what does a citizen do when it is a BBMP official himself violating all the rules.

• thumb_up 37 Likes
• · login or register to post comments

In what appears to be an act of vengeance, an Assistant Executive Engineer (AEE) of Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike has served a ‘building plan violation’ notice to an elderly woman Satya Achayya.

Incidentally, Satya Achayya is one of the petitioners to file public interest litigation in the Karnataka High Court against the rampant building plan violations.

The AEE served the notice based on two RTI applications filed by Syed Sanaulla and Syed Javid Khadir. The duo filed identical RTI applications on a single day seeking the sanctioned building plan and licence for construction of house number 17, owned by Satya Achayya, located on 6 Cross, Nandidurga Extension, Jayamahal in the City.

Based on the RTI query, the AEE has asked Achayya to submit the licence and the sanctioned building plan within three days of receiving the notice or else he will be forced to act against her under the Karnataka Municipal Corporation (KMC) Act.

Baffled by the tone and tenor of the notice, Achayya replied to the notice stating that the building was constructed by her late father K C Achayya in the 1960s and since then there has been no construction activity on the property. Elaborating further, she said, “As such, the house was constructed before the KMC Act, 1976 came into force.”Achayya in her letter to the AEE further stated, “The two RTI queries you have attached to your notice do not state that any construction is going on in the property.”

For the full text of the report in the Deccan Herald, click here.

After failing to get a proper response from the BBMP AEE, or his colleagues or seniors, to her repeat complaints against the rampant byelaw violations all around her 50+ year old house in Benson Town, when she files a PIL, this kind of an audacious response from the AEE, shows the extent to which the BBMP has come to be in the grip of the mafia, with the obvious blessings of the politicos, perhaps even at the highest level.

And, mind you, this is not the first time. This is more or less a repeat of another witch-hunt, carried out by another BBMP AEE, against three Koramangala residents, who took up the issue of an illegal eatery in their neighborhood, described more fully here. This is even as the very same AEE was himself constructing a building, in the ward under his jurisdiction, in total violation of every possible building by-law, all of which has been brought out in my post of 16th July (scroll above).

Violations naturally go hand in hand with poor quality, leading to the kind of mishaps that occured, in the not too distant past, in the backyard of two of our senior cabinet ministers, resulting in quite a few fatalities even - check here. All the same, none of it seems to matter to the people involved, apart from the theatrics on display immediately after the event.

Obviously, things have gone beyond all limits. And, unless the city Civil Society intervenes in the matter at least now, in some effective way, there's very little hope for the city.

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

Based on a high court direction, the fire and emergency services department had begun inspecting buildings. In all, 18,442 high-rises were identified in Karnataka and of these 17,547 were in Bengaluru. In the first phase, 2,205 buildings were physically inspected of which 1,216 were found to have violated norms.

"As per rules, before constructing a building, a no-objection certificate has to be obtained from the department which will check if the blueprint complies with safety requirements. Once construction is over, officials will inspect and verify whether the buildings have been built following these plans. Then a clearance certificate is issued. These 1,216 buildings have violated norms," said MN Reddi, director general, fire and emergency services.

The buildings will be given some time to rectify their problems. Even after the allotted time, if they don't comply with norms, a government order will be issued to cut the essential services.

For the full text of the report in the ToI, click here.

Now, each of the 'akrama' buildings in Satya Achayya's neighbourhood (check my post of 1st Sept, scrolling above), about which she has complained to the concerned authorities, is apparently over 15M tall, and hence in need of fire department clearance. The one constructed by the BBMP AEE, referred to in my post of the 16th July, is most certainly over 15M tall. Very obviously, all of these have been constructed based on a 'contruction plan', as different from a 'sanctioned plan'. One wonders if these find place in the list of 1,216 buildings found by the fire department to be in violation of the norms. Either way, there's absolutely no scope for rectification in each of these cases - they have just to be demolished. Will the fire department ever get down to doing that? Unless they do, many more of Carlton, Uphaar (Delhi), and our own 'Someshwara Layout' (in the so-called revenue pockets, in the very backyard of two of our cabinet ministers - check here) are all waiting to happen.

One hopes the no-nonsense DG will pro-actively look into these matters, lest his department be found fault with when, god forbid, a mishap occurs.

• thumb_up 37 Likes
• · login or register to post comments

In another PIL, a group of citizens had sought compulsory inspection of property before granting sanction for plan, particularly multi-storey structures, to ascertain whether the existing infrastructure is sufficient to accommodate such structures, and for a detailed guidelines for the process of plan sanction.

As the counsel for civic agencies and the State admitted that there can be no two opinions that building bye-laws must be strictly complied with, the Bench disposed of the petition while directing authorities “to implement the building bye-laws strictly, in accordance with law”.

For the full text of the report in The Hindu, click here.

It has now to be examined as to how best to put the judgment to use in curbing the rampant akrama going on all around the city.
 

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

While this G+4 building, along Temple Trees avenue, Kaveri Layout in Koramangala (check here for exact location), which even a school kid will list as in violation of every conceivable law - set-back, FSI, fire-safety, encroachment onto the Kaluve, etc, is typical of the many such "akrama buildings" across Bengaluru, what is most significant about this one is that the owner is none other than the erstwhile Koramangala sub-division AEE, S H Pujari - check this report in the Bangalore Mirror.

Following a complaint by local residents, the Upa Lokayukta issued demolition orders, against which Mr Pujari has now managed to obtain an injunction from the City Civil Court. The Upa Lokayukta has in turn directed the BBMP Commissioner to have the injunction vacated and execute his order.

Subsequently, Mr Pujari managed to get re-posted to PWD, his parent body, apparently to preempt any official action against him, going by this Bangalore Mirror report.
 

• thumb_up 42 Likes
• · login or register to post comments