- (1.) The challenge in the present writ petition is to the show cause notices dated 12.04.2012 (Annexure P-4) and 19.02.2013 (Annexure P-5) issued under Chandigarh Estate Rules, 2007 read with Section 8-A of Capital of Punjab (Development and Regulation) Act, 1952 (for short the Act). The petitioner has also claimed a writ of mandamus directing the official respondents to approve/sanction and deliver the Revised Building Plan submitted by the petitioners on 14.09.2011. One Ms. Jaspreet Kaur was the owner in possession of free-hold residential plot now House No. 1029, Sector 19-B, Chandigarh. Half of the said house was purchased by respondents No. 4 and 5 whereas the remaining half was purchased by the petitioners on 28.11.2006.
(2.) The petitioners submitted Revised Building Plan for modification of the first and second floor said to be in their possession and deposited necessary fee on 14.09.2011 but Revised Building Plan was not sanctioned. On the other hand, show cause notices were issued for removal of the violations on the first and second floor of the house. The petitioners served notice upon the respondents that a condition of obtaining no objection from the other co-sharers is not warranted. Reference was made to some of the orders passed by this Court in some of the writ petitions i.e. CWP No. 18788 of 2007 titled as Deepak Bhasin v. Union Territory, Chandigarh, decided on 06.08.2009; LPA No. 32 of 2012 titled as Union Territory, Chandigarh v. Deepak Bhasin, decided on 18.01.2010; CWP No. 15186 of 2011 titled as Anuj Aggarwal and another v. Union Territory, Chandigarh and others, decided on 12.12.2012 and CWP No. 15187 of 2011 titled as Rajesh Gupta v. Union Territory, Chandigarh and others, decided on 12.12.2012.
(3.) In reply to the writ petition, the stand taken by the respondents is that request for sanction of revised building plan cannot be acceded as the same are not signed by all the co-owners.;