Readiness and Willingness Under Section 16(c) Is Not a Ritualistic Phrase — Plaintiff Must Prove It With Substance, Not Just Words: Karnataka High Court FIR in Disproportionate Assets Case Quashed: Patna High Court Slams SP for 'Non-Application of Mind' and 'Absence of Credible Source Information' Ownership of Vehicle Linked to Commercial Quantity of Heroin – Custodial Interrogation Necessary: Punjab & Haryana High Court Denies Anticipatory Bail under Section 482 BNSS Death Caused by Rash Driving Is Not a Private Dispute — No FIR Quashing on Basis of Compromise in Section 106 BNS Cases: Punjab & Haryana High Court No Bank Can Override Court Orders: Rajasthan High Court Slams Axis Bank for Unauthorized Withdrawal from Court-Ordered FD" Indian Courts Cannot Invalidate Foreign Arbitral Awards Passed Under Foreign Law: Madhya Pradesh High Court Enforces Texas-Based Award Despite Commercial Court’s Contrary Decree Sudden Quarrel over Mound of Earth — Not Murder but Culpable Homicide: Allahabad High Court Bar Under Order II Rule 2 CPC Cannot Be Invoked Where Specific Performance Was Legally Premature Due To Statutory Impediments: P&H High Court Calling Wife by Her Caste Name in Public Just Before Suicide is Immediate Cause of Self-Immolation: Madras High Court Upholds Husband’s Conviction Under Section 306 IPC No Work No Pay Is Not a Universal Rule: Punjab & Haryana High Court Dock Identification Without Prior TIP Is Absolutely Useless: P&H High Court Upholds Acquittal in Attempt to Murder Case Filing Forged Court Pleadings in Union Government’s Name is Criminal Contempt: Karnataka High Court Sentences Litigant to Jail Execution of Will Proved, But Probate Justly Denied Due to Concealment of Property Sale: Delhi High Court Mere Designation Doesn’t Establish Criminal Liability: Bombay High Court Quashes Proceedings Against ICICI Officials in Octroi Evasion Case Fraud on Power Voids the Order: Supreme Court Quashes FIR Against Karnataka BJP Leader R. Ashoka, Slams Politically Motivated Prosecution Cause of Fire Is Immaterial If Fire Itself Is Insured Peril: Supreme Court Rebukes Insurer’s Repudiation Dragging a Trained Army Officer Up 20 Steps Without Resistance? The Story Lacks Credence: Supreme Court Upholds Acquittal in Army Officer’s Murder Semen Stains Alone Do Not Prove Rape: Supreme Court Acquits Doctor Accused of Rape No Mortgage, No SARFAESI: Supreme Court Rules Against NEDFi, Says Recovery Action in Nagaland Without Security Agreement Was Illegal Parity Cannot Be Denied by Geography: Supreme Court Holds Jharkhand Bound by Patna HC's Judgment, Orders Pay Revision for Industries Officer Once Power Flows Continuously from a Synchronized Turbine, It Is No Longer Infirm: Supreme Court Orders TANGEDCO to Pay Fixed Charges to Penna Electricity

Supreme Court Prohibits Redensification and Apartmentalization in Corbusier's Chandigarh to Preserve Heritage Status

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a landmark judgment, the Supreme Court of India has taken a significant step towards preserving the heritage status of Corbusier's Chandigarh by prohibiting redensification and apartmentalization in Phase-I of the city. The judgment, delivered by a bench comprising Hon'ble Mr. Justice B.R. Gavai and Hon'ble Mrs. Justice B.V. Nagarathna, emphasizes the need to maintain the unique character and integrity of the city.

The court's decision comes in response to a case challenging the rampant urban development and haphazard construction practices that have plagued Chandigarh, once considered an ideal city. The judgment notes the adverse impact of unregulated growth, such as traffic congestion, inadequate infrastructure, and the depletion of natural resources.

"Fragmentation of Residential Units Prohibited to Protect Heritage Status: Supreme Court." This highlights the court's clear stance on preventing the division, fragmentation, bifurcation, and apartmentalization of residential units in Phase-I of Chandigarh, which has a heritage value due to its association with renowned architect Le Corbusier.

The Supreme Court has directed the Heritage Committee to assess the issue of redensification in Phase-I. The committee's evaluation will take into account the preservation of the northern sectors of Chandigarh, which hold significant architectural and historical value. It will also consider the impact of redensification on parking and traffic issues within the city.

To enforce these measures, the court has mandated the Chandigarh Administration to amend the Chandigarh Master Plan 2031 (CMP-2031) and the Chandigarh Estate Rules of 2017. These amendments will align with the Heritage Committee's recommendations and require approval from the Central Government, ensuring the preservation of Chandigarh's heritage status.

The judgment further highlights the court's concern for sustainable development and environmental protection. It emphasizes the importance of striking a balance between urban growth and preserving the natural environment. The court recommends the implementation of Environmental Impact Assessment studies before granting permissions for urban development projects.

Citing the need for broader attention, the court calls upon the legislature, executive, and policymakers at the central and state levels to take note of the damage caused by unplanned development and prioritize necessary measures for environmental conservation.

The verdict, which sets a precedent for future urban development cases, has been applauded by experts and heritage enthusiasts who believe that preserving the integrity of Corbusier's Chandigarh is essential to safeguard its cultural and architectural heritage.

The judgment concludes by urging the Cabinet Secretary to the Union of India and the Chief Secretaries of all states to consider the court's observations and take earnest steps to protect and promote sustainable development practices.

Overall, the Supreme Court's decision to prohibit redensification and apartmentalization in Corbusier's Chandigarh underscores the significance of preserving heritage and maintaining a balance between development and environmental conservation. The judgment serves as a clarion call for responsible urban planning and development across the country.

DATE OF DECISION: January 10, 2023

RESIDENT’S WELFARE ASSOCIATION vs THE UNION TERRITORY OF  CHANDIGARH AND OTHERS .   

[gview file="https://lawyer-e-news.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/06/10-Jan-2023-Chandigarh.pdf"]

Latest Legal News