Latest news with #SureshwarThakur
Indian Express
18-05-2025
- Business
- Indian Express
Punjab and Haryana High Court pulls up Bajwa Developers for poor amenities at New Sunny Enclave
The Punjab and Haryana High Court has ordered firm action against Bajwa Developers Ltd. for failing to meet basic infrastructure commitments in a mega housing project in New Sunny Enclave, Kharar. The court has also directed the Greater Mohali Area Development Authority (GMADA) and Punjab State Power Corporation Limited (PSPCL) to resolve the electricity supply issues faced by residents. The order, passed earlier this week by Justice Sureshwar Thakur, came in a batch of six connected petitions filed between 2021 and 2023. The petitions were filed by the New Sunny Enclave Residents Social Welfare Association and several individual homeowners, who alleged that the developer had failed to comply with previous court directions and sought that the authorities take over the project. Developer failed to meet NOC conditions: Court A key issue in the case was the developer's failure to comply with the terms of a No Objection Certificate (NOC) issued by PSPCL in 2017. In an affidavit filed by Taranjeet Singh, Senior Executive Engineer at PSPCL, the court was told: 'The Developer has failed to comply with the terms of the aforementioned No Objection Certificate (NOC)… Furthermore, the Developer has not applied for a new/revised NOC to date.' Due to this non-compliance, permanent electricity connections have not been provided to many homes in the area. During a site inspection in March 2025, PSPCL found that six 500 KVA transformers had been erected without official seals and that work on high and low tension lines was still in progress. Justice Thakur observed that the existing infrastructure was already overloaded. 'Unless additional land for installation of the requisite infrastructure is released in favour of PSPCL… electricity connections may not be amenable to become released,' the order stated. Unsold land to be used for infrastructure, auction ordered The court referred to records indicating that two acres of land owned by Bajwa Developers remain unsold. It directed that this land be used to set up the required power infrastructure for the colony. Further, the land and plots hypothecated by Bajwa Developers with GMADA will now be auctioned by the district collector within one month of the order to raise funds for pending works. In a major move, the court handed over responsibility for completing all basic amenities—both external and internal development works—to a team headed by the Chief Secretary of Punjab, along with two auditors from the Comptroller and Auditor General (CAG), Chandigarh. The team has been tasked with surveying the colony to assess the extent and cost of unfinished work. All the basic amenities that were originally to be provided by Bajwa Developers, as per the licence issued to them, will now be completed by this committee. GMADA, PSPCL also held accountable The court noted that GMADA and PSPCL were responsible for ensuring infrastructure under the NOC issued in 2017. 'As per Clause 3 and Clause 4 of the issued NOC… GMADA was responsible for bearing all costs associated with the 66 kV Grid Sub-station, 66 KV Transmission Line, 11 KV Line, and related infrastructure.' However, the court pointed out that neither GMADA nor the developer had provided the required land for these installations. The petitioners were represented by advocates Deepak Goyat, Ashwani Talwar, and Rakesh Dhiman. Senior advocates Anu Chatrath (for GMADA and PSPCL) and Baltej Singh Sidhu (for Bajwa Developers) appeared for the respondents. Residents see hope after long delay The ruling is being seen as a relief for hundreds of residents who have faced prolonged delays and unreliable services. PSPCL has said it will provide permanent electricity connections 'as and when revised NOC is sought by the Builder, and the terms and conditions incorporated in the said NOC are complied with'.
Hindustan Times
17-05-2025
- Business
- Hindustan Times
Sell unsold plots to develop Sunny Enclave infra: High court to Mohali DC
In a landmark decision, the Punjab and Haryana High Court has mandated the sale of unsold plots belonging to a Mohali-based builder, directing that the proceeds be used for the development of physical infrastructure in the Sunny Enclave area of Kharar, spread in 350 acre of land. The order was passed by a bench comprising Justice Sureshwar Thakur and Justice Vikas Suri, on a clutch of petitions from New Sunny Enclave Residents Social Welfare Association, other resident welfare associations (RWAs), and individual allottees. The petitioners had alleged a lack of civic infrastructure development by the developer, Jarnail Singh Bajwa. According to Sameer Sachdeva, a lawyer involved in the case, thousands of allottees were affected as plots were sold but necessary infrastructure such as roads, drainage, electricity lines, and parks, etc, were not developed in the societies and independent residential units spread in 350 acre of land. These localities fall in Sectors 120, 123, 124 and 117 in Jandpur, Manana, Sihampur and Hassnapur villages. The Sunny Enclave project, once touted as the largest in the tricity, was conceptualised and developed over the past 15-20 years. The HC has directed the Mohali deputy commissioner (DC) to oversee and conduct the auction of the properties within one month. Furthermore, the chief secretary has been directed to establish a special cell comprising three auditors to assess the pending development works at the sites, prepare cost estimates, and monitor financial expenditures. The Greater Mohali Area Development Authority (GMADA) will be responsible for executing the construction work, with the entire process to be completed within four months. The court stipulated that any remaining funds after the infrastructure development would be used to settle outstanding government charges owed by the developer, and any surplus thereafter would be released to the developer. The court did not agree with the argument raised by the developer that buyers can approach RERA with their complaints. 'At this stage, (it would be) an extremely elongated remedy (sending buyers to RERA), besides would further enmesh the allottees/homebuyers in an avoidable quagmire of litigation,' the bench observed disposing of the pleas. It also noted that in some works' cases he had given an undertaking that unexecuted work could be completed by the GMADA in lieu of vacant plots. The residents' plea highlighted that over fifteen years had passed without the developer providing essential basic facilities and completing all external and internal development works. They had also sought directives to prevent the authorities from allowing the developer to undertake any new projects until the pending works in Sunny Enclave were completed.
Time of India
05-05-2025
- Business
- Time of India
Punjab and Haryana HC strikes down rule on land surrender, licence forfeiture by developers
CHANDIGARH : The Punjab and Haryana high court invalidated a clause in the Haryana Development and Regulation of Urban Areas (Amendment) Rules, 2020, which allowed the state to demand land surrender and forfeit substantial sums from real estate developers giving up their development licences. According to the high court, such demands were excessive, legally unsound, and infringed on the developers' constitutional rights. On July 24, 2020, the Haryana govt amended the Haryana Development and Regulation of Urban Area Rules, 1976, by inserting Rule 17-B and renaming the aforesaid rules as the Haryana Development and Regulation of Urban Areas (Amendment) Rules, 2020. The said amendment was under challenge before the high court. The division bench, comprising Justice Sureshwar Thakur and Justice Vikas Suri, passed these orders while disposing of a petition filed by Faith Buildtech Private Limited. The petitioner company invested around Rs 618 crores for the purchase of the lands, stamp duty, scrutiny fee, licence fee, conversion charges, EDC, and IDC for the said licences. Under Licence No. 45 of 2014, the petitioner conceptualised the development of a group housing colony on land measuring 17.806 acres in Sector-4, Sohna, and accordingly, the petitioner got all the requisite approvals and permissions sanctioned from the authorities concerned. Subsequently, the petitioner launched the said project in 2014. However, the state failed to lay the essential infrastructure in the area as per the Sohna master plan. The petitioner company paid Rs 61.416 crores towards External Development Charges/Internal Development Charges for Licence No. 45 of 2014 and Licence No. 90 of 2014. The petitioner also moved several representations before the authorities concerned regarding the laying of essential infrastructure and acquisitions of land for a 60-metre-wide sectoral road. However, no reply was received from the respondents concerned. Finally, the petitioner, in order to avoid the initiation of penal action by the state and to reduce its liabilities, applied for the surrender of licences bearing Nos. 45 of 2014 and 90 of 2014. The petitioner company's applications were approved by the state on December 28, 2021, and December 31, 2021. However, owing to the stringent conditions of the policy dated July 24, 2020, regarding the surrender of licences under Rule 17-B, an amount of Rs 31.759 crores was forfeited by state authorities. Moreover, the petitioner was also forced to surrender 4.40 acres of land free of cost. The main grievance of the company was that it was compelled to forfeit significant fees and transfer the land under the amended Rule 17-B, which was notified by the July 2020 notification. After hearing all the parties, the bench ordered to set aside the impugned notification declaring it to be ultra vires the fundamental rights of practice, business, and profession.
Time of India
04-05-2025
- Business
- Time of India
Punjab and Haryana HC strikes down rule forcing land forfeiture, licence surrender by real estate developers
CHANDIGARH: The Punjab and Haryana high court invalidated a clause in the Haryana Development and Regulation of Urban Areas (Amendment) Rules, 2020, which allowed the state to demand land surrender and forfeit substantial sums from real estate developers giving up their development licences. Tired of too many ads? go ad free now According to the high court, such demands were excessive, legally unsound, and infringed on the developers' constitutional rights. On July 24, 2020, the Haryana govt amended the Haryana Development and Regulation of Urban Area Rules, 1976, by inserting Rule 17-B and renaming the aforesaid rules as the Haryana Development and Regulation of Urban Areas (Amendment) Rules, 2020. The said amendment was under challenge before the high court. The division bench, comprising Justice Sureshwar Thakur and Justice Vikas Suri, passed these orders while disposing of a petition filed by Faith Buildtech Private Limited. The petitioner company invested around Rs 618 crores for the purchase of the lands, stamp duty, scrutiny fee, licence fee, conversion charges, EDC, and IDC for the said licences. Under Licence No. 45 of 2014, the petitioner conceptualised the development of a group housing colony on land measuring 17.806 acres in Sector-4, Sohna, and accordingly, the petitioner got all the requisite approvals and permissions sanctioned from the authorities concerned. Subsequently, the petitioner launched the said project in 2014. However, the state failed to lay the essential infrastructure in the area as per the Sohna master plan. The petitioner company paid Rs 61.416 crores towards External Development Charges/Internal Development Charges for Licence No. 45 of 2014 and Licence No. 90 of 2014. The petitioner also moved several representations before the authorities concerned regarding the laying of essential infrastructure and acquisitions of land for a 60-metre-wide sectoral road. Tired of too many ads? go ad free now However, no reply was received from the respondents concerned. Finally, the petitioner, in order to avoid the initiation of penal action by the state and to reduce its liabilities, applied for the surrender of licences bearing Nos. 45 of 2014 and 90 of 2014. The petitioner company's applications were approved by the state on December 28, 2021, and December 31, 2021. However, owing to the stringent conditions of the policy dated July 24, 2020, regarding the surrender of licences under Rule 17-B, an amount of Rs 31.759 crores was forfeited by state authorities. Moreover, the petitioner was also forced to surrender 4.40 acres of land free of cost. The main grievance of the company was that it was compelled to forfeit significant fees and transfer the land under the amended Rule 17-B, which was notified by the July 2020 notification. After hearing all the parties, the bench ordered to set aside the impugned notification declaring it to be ultra vires the fundamental rights of practice, business, and profession.
