Court questions over delay of action against VIPs

Oct 11: ‘You may be a member of parliament or a minister but you cannot break the law’ was the attitude of the division bench earlier in the same case of illegal constructions in Lutyens zone of the capital which houses politicians and bureaucrats.

Re-iterating in the same tone Delhi High Court on Wednesday questioned the government why no action has been taken against those VIPs who have constructed illegally in the premises of the official bungalows without prior permission of CPWD.

Government has to give answer to the explanation demanded by the court till January 16 2008.

This is to be known that Lutyens zone comes under the protected are for its heritage status and it is quite illegal to modify the basic structure without prior permission.

Many ministers, MPs and bureaucrats have violated the law and CPWD has been slow in taking action against the political personalities such as L K Advani, Sushma Swaraj, Omar Abdullah, Amar Singh, KPS Gill and Ram Vilas Paswan.

Initially 90 bungalows were reported to have illegal constructions out which 16 removed after the notice served by the ministry of urban development while the replies of others are under scrutiny. Currently 77 VIP bungalows have unauthorised construction.

Suo moto cognizance was taken by the court of the issue of illegal construction two years ago when justice A K Sikri forwarded the matter to the chief justice.

Despite the court’s order to demolish the illegal constructions the pace with which the orders were being carried out by CPWD, it earned the wrath of the court.

High Court Chief justice said, “I do not know where we are heading, for these VIPs can do whatever they want...they can’t be touched.”

Roused at the affidavit filed by the director, Urban Development Ministry, Chief Justice said, “If a VIP can flout the building laws here as you watch on helplessly, then we, the common man can also follow.”

Bench also suggested that CPWD should complete their work during the period of transfer of the occupant.

Court asked CPWD to take quick action on the issue. The court also suggested to first taking action against the major violations.