Realty check: HC won’t lift ban on unapproved layouts

Refusing to entertain as many as 30 new petitions including those from real estate associations seeking to implead themselves in the case, the first bench comprising Chief Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul and Justice R Mahadevan, said “You feel that by putting pressure, something will be done. We know why this is being done. We will not succumb to such pressures.” Also, noting that “the registrations had stopped not because of our orders alone,” the judges said, “It’s high time the State came out with some policy or scheme to ensure that both the nature of land and constructions are governed.” 

The ban imposed by the first bench on September 9, had directed registration department officials not to register sale deeds of unapproved layouts and buildings. The order was an offshoot of a PIL, which contended that indiscriminate conversion of agricultural lands would have a drastic effect on the environment on the long run. On Friday, in a packed court hall, counsels appearing for developers claimed that the ban has not only caused great hardship to the buyers and sellers, but also to the other stake holders like real estate owners, builders, land developers and mediators. 

However, when a senior counsel pointed out that owing to the ban, the State has lost a revenue of Rs. 274 crores, the Chief Justice retorted, asking that just because smuggling raked in a lot of money, could it be permitted? Also, noting that the real estate industry is the ‘most unregulated and uncontrolled’, the Chief Justice observed that, “Some methodology should be evolved to stem the problem of such unauthorised layouts and unplanned urbanisation and evolve practical ways to take the issue forward.” 

However, when the petitioners brought about specific cases like gift deed or carving out a piece of land for such facilities as mobile towers, the bench sought them to come out with specific averments by filing separate writ petitions. The bench also directed the counsels appearing for the developers to come together and categorise the issues by inter se discussion between them so that the categories, which may still require further adjudication of policy formulation by the Government can be taken up. The bench then adjourned the matter to November 16 for further hearing.