TO,
NARENDRA MODI,
GUJARAT CHIEF MINISTER,
GANDHINAGAR, GUJARAT.
APPLICANT
JITENDRA MOHANDAS CHANDWANI
3B, CHANDRA NAGAR SOCIETY, NEAR SURYA NAGAR GARBA GROUND, WAGHODIA ROAD,
VADODARA 390019.
MOBILE- 09913647030
AGAINST
VADODARA MUNICIPAL CORPORATION,
KHANDERAO MARKET BUILDING, DANDIA BAZAAR, VADODARA 390001.
AND
VADODARA POLICE,
POLICE BHAVAN, JAIL ROAD, OPP CENTRAL JAIL, VADODARA.
AND
MANY OTHERS
SUBJECT
APPLICATION TO TAKE ACTIONS AND TO GIVE OPPURTUNITY TO BE HEARD TO EXPLAIN THE
SITUATION AND PROBLEM TO PRESENT THE FACTS, SO THAT NECESSARY ACTION ARE TAKEN
AGAINST THE RESPONSIBLE PERSONS, FOR WRONGFULL ACT TAKEN AGAINST ME, BY DEMOLISHING
PART OF MY SHOP WHICH WAS LEGAL, UNDER PARTIALITY AND ON DOUBLE STANDARDS, TO
PRESSURE ME, BY TAKING BRIBE, SO THAT I LOSE MY CONFIDENCE ON LAW, AND ALSO TO TAKE
ACTION EMPLOYEES OF MUNICIPAL CORPORATION FOR SUCH ACTION, NOT TAKING NECESSARY
ACTIONS POSSIBLE UNDER CASE, TAKING DOUBLE STANDARDS, SUPPORTING HELPING THE WRONG
DOERS AND PERSONS RESPONSIBLE, FOR DENYING THE SITUATION ON THE PLACE AND FOR GIVING
FALSE INFORMATION TO MUNICIPAL COMMISSIONER AND HIS DEPUTY, ALSO TO COLLECTOR AND
HIS DEPUTY, AND ALSO TO CHIEF MINISTER AND TO DEPUTY COLLECTOR OF JANSAMPARK AND
OTHERS, AND FOR NOT DOING DUTY AS REQUIRED BY SITUATION INPUBLIC INTEREST.
DEAR SIR,
I BOUGHT THE SHOP ON DATE 19\02\2007 IN VITHAL MANDIR LANE, SENSUS NUMBER A\4\113, ON
VADODARA MAP VIBHAG "A" TIKKA NUMBER 1\5, SURVEY NUMBER 87, THE PROPERTY WAS OLD
AND WAS DEMOLISHED AND NEW BUILDING WAS CONSTRUCTED BY NAME "KAMAL SHRI
CHAMBERS" ALSO KNOWN AS "24 CARATS" OF WHICH I BOUGHT SHOP ON GROUND FLOOR
NUMBER G 2 A, WITH APPROXIMATE SQUARE FEET 91 AREA.
BUT THE BUILDING HAS MANY FAULTS AND ENCROACHMENTS, I COMPLAINED THE MUNICIPAL
CORPORATION, BUT MUNICIPAL AUTHORITIES TOOK BRIBE AND DID NOT TOOK ACTION, AND
SHOWED LAZINESS IN REPLYING, ALSO I HAVE TO COMPLAINT THE CHIEF MINISTER FOR JUSTICE
AND ACTION TO BE TAKEN, BUT THE MUNICIPAL AUTHORITIES TO TAKE REVENGE THEY DID NOT
TOOK ACTION COMPLETELY, THEY ONLY REMOVED FEW ENCROACHMENT JUST TO SHOW THAT THE
ACTION ARE TAKEN AND ALSO DEMOLISHED MY SHOP IN THE BUILDING WHICH WAS COMPLETELY
LEGAL AND NO ENCROACHMENT, I ALSO INFORMED OF IT TO THEM IN WRITTEN AND ORALLY, THEY
TOOK DOUBLE STANDARDS FOR TAKING ACTION, WHERE THEY DID MEETING WITH THE BUILDERS
AND OTHERS IN NEAR TEMPLE, IN BUILDERS OFFICE ALSO, BUT TOLD ME TO COME IN OFFICE, THEY
ALSO WANTED ME TO ENTER IN OTHER PERSONS LIMIT OF SHOP BY DEMOLISHING THE PARTITION
WALL, WHICH WAS NOT MY. I REQUEST FOLLOWING ACTION TO BE TAKEN,
1 TO MAKE SPACES LIKE PASSAGE, OTS, CONSTRUCTION, ETC OF THE BUILDING AS PER APPROVED
MAP, REMOVE EVERY UNNECESSARY CONSTRUCTION OR ENCROACHMENT, OF ANY KIND PLASTIC,
WOOD, CONCRETE, BRICKED, IRON, ETC, FROM CEILING, FLOOR, WALL, COMMON AREAS, ETC, AND
MAKE COMPLETE BUILDING AS PER MAP, FOR SUCH IF NECESSARY THE BUILDER SHOULD APPOINT
THE STRUCTURE ENGINEER,
2 TO COLLECT THE TAX FROM BUILDER FOR ENCROACHED LIMIT FOR THE WHOLE PERIOD USED,
AND TO FINE FOR THE SAME FOR ENCROACHMENT, OR CHARGE TO REMOVE IT,
3 TO PUT THE BOARD OF THE NAME OF THE BUILDING IN GUJARATI, ALSO TO MAKE THE PLACE OF
THE BOARD FOR THE EVERY SHOPKEEPER, OR BUSINESS OR PERSON,
4 TO ORDER THE BUILDER TO OBTAIN THE STRUCTURE STABILITY CERTIFICATE OR OCCUPATION
CERTIFICATE FOR THE CONSTRUCTION, UNTILL THEN TO SEAL THE BUILDING, AS AFTER FEW
DEMOLISH THEIR IS RISK AND DANGER, IN CERTAIN PLACES, AND AFTER THE TIME OF 2 YEAR ALSO
THE NO REPAIR IS DONE FOR IT,
5 SEAL THE FIRST AND SECOND FLOOR, AS THE PERMISSION OF THE FIRST AND SECOND FLOOR WAS
RESEDENTIAL BUT THE BUILDERS ARE USING AS COMMERCIAL, EVEN AFTER THEY WERE WARNED
FOR SO, FOR WHICH WE HAVE PROOF ALSO,
6 TO TAKE ACTION AGAINST THE MUNICIPAL CORPORATION AND ITS EMPLOYEES FOR NOT TAKING
ACTION, PROVIDING WRONG STATEMENTS AND WRONG DECISION, WRONG ANSWERS AND
WRONG REPLY, DEMOLISHING MY LEGAL WHICH WITHOUT ENCROACHMENT SHOP, AND TO
DISMISS EMPLOYEES FOR THE SAME AND FINANCIAL COMPENSATION FOR SUCH ACTIONS,
7 ALSO SOME PARTS WERE AND ARE USED BUT THEY ARE SHOWN TO MUNICIPALCORPORATION AS
VACANT AND NOT OCCUPIED OR AS RESIDENTIAL AND USED AS COMMERCIAL, AND NO TAX IS PAID
OR COLLECTED, BUT THEY ARE USED, SO TAX FOR PROPERTIES SHOULD BE COLLECTED, AND THE
PERSONS SHOULD BE FINED FOR THAT,
8 TO TAKE ANY OTHER, FURTHER, NECESSARY, REQUIRED, SUTABLE, ETC ACTION FOR THE
SITUATION, OR WHICEVER YOUR OFFICE FIND NECESSARY OR IMPORTANT IN CASE,
9 TO SEND THE NEW TEAM OR PERSON(S) ON THE PLACE, FOR THE INVESTIGATE, OTHER THAN
MUNICIPAL CORPORATION EMPLOYEES BECAUSE THEY DID NOT DID SATISFACTORY ACTION,
10 TO RECONSTRUCT MY SHOP AS IT WAS EARLIER IN THE SAME CONDITION BEFORE AS IT WAS,
AND GIVE COMPENSATION FOR DAMAGE, MENTAL HARASSMENT, TROUBLE, PUNITIVE DAMAGES,
LOSS, ETC.
11 TO LODGE FIR AGAINST THE BUILDERS, DEVELOPERS, PROMOTERS, SELLERS, ETC OF THE
BUILDING AND AGAINST THE MUNICIPAL CORPORATION AND ITS AUTHORITIES DEPUTY MUNICIPAL
COMMISSIONER, TOWN DEVELOPMENT OFFICER, DEPUTY TOWN DEVELOPMENT OFFICER,
BUILDING INSPECTOR, SURVEYOR, WARD OFFICER, ETC AS REQUESTED BY ME IN THE APPLICATION
GIVEN TO POLICE COMMISSIONER AND POLICE INSPECTOR WHICH IS STILL NOT DONE BY THEM
UPTILL TODAY, SAYING THAT THE MATTER IS CIVIL IN NATURE AND I HAVE ALREADY FILED
CONSUMER CASE AGAINST THE BUILDER, ( WHICH IS ONLY FOR DAMAGE/LOSS ), WHICH IS AGAINST
THE SUPREME COURT JUDGEMENTS AND DIRECTIONS COPY OF WHICH IS ATTACHED,
I AM ATTACHING SOME DOCUMENTS AND PICTURES WITH MY EMAIL, WHICH WOULD PROVE
DOUBLE STANDARDS AND THAT THE AUTHORITIES AND OFFICER ARE NOT SCARED TO ANSWER AND
REPLY FALSE TO CHIEF MINISTER, GOVERNOR, CENTRAL CORENMENT AND PRESIDENT ALSO.
(1) IN THE PICTURE NO J8 YOU CAN SEE THE PART COPY SCAN OF THE APPROVED MAP OF THE
BUILDING, NOW YOU CAN COMPARE IT WITH THE J26 PICTURE IT IS THE COPY OF THE DOCUMENT
GIVEN TO ME BY THE CITY SURVEY AUTHORITY ALSO TO ADD THIS IS NOT 100% ACCURATE, IT CAN
BE SAID IT IS 25% ACCURATE, IF 100% ACUURATE IS DONE YOU WILL FIND MORE FAULTS IN THE
BUILDING IN QUESTION AND SUBJECT, IT IS THE ROUGHLY MADE MAP BY THEM WHICH IT SHOWS
THE POSITION OF THE BUILDING OF GROUND FLOOR AFTER DEMOLITION, SEE HOW IT DOES NOT
MATCH WITH APPROVED EVEN AFTER THE DEMOLITION, SO HOW WOULD IT WILL MATCH BEFORE
DEMOLITION, STILL EARLIER BEFORE DEMOLITION I RECEIVED LETTER AND COPY OF WHICH WAS
SENDED TO CHIEF MINISTER HIMSELF THAT THERE IN THE BUILDING THERE IS NO ENCROACHMENT
AND PASSAGE AND OTS AND CONSTRUCTION IS AS PER APPROVED MAP, YOU ALSO SEE WHERE THE
AUTHORITIES STILL CLAIM THAT THE BUILDING IS AS PER MAP AND OTS IS OPEN, BUT YOU CAN SEE
FRONT 9FT6IN BY 4FT OTS IS NOT PRESENT IN THE BUILDING, WE ALL KNOW THE IMPORTANCE OF
THE OTS
(2) J1 IS THE COPY OF THE BILL THAT PROVES THAT THE BUILDING 1ST AND 2ND FLOOR ARE
OPERATING AS COMMERCIAL ANY TIME IT WANT TO BE, WHERE THE AUTHORITIES CLAIM IT TO BE
NOT OPERATING, IT IS APPROVED AS RESIDENTIAL,
(3) INPICTURE J2 YOU CAN SEE THAT THE AUTHORITIES REPLY MY RTI APPLICATION STATING MY
REQUEST MADE ON 24/6/2011, WHAT IS THE NEED FOR THAT, ALSO YOU CAN SEE APPLICATION
WAS MADE ON 6/9/11 AND LETTER TO DEPOSIT IS MADE AND SIGNED ON 13/10/11, OUTWARD ON
14/10/11 AND THE SAME WAS MADE ME DELIVERED ON 15/10/11, LATE AFTER 40 DAYS NOT 30
DAYS, AND STILL THEY WANT ME TO PAY FOR THE INFORMATION GOING TO BE GIVEN, WHEN I
INFORMED AND TOLD PUBLIC INFORMATION OFFICER OF PUBLIC AUTHORITY HE TOLD ME I HAVE
TO PAY FEES IF I WANT TO GET COPIES AND AGAINST IT I APPEALED TO APPELLATE AUTHORITY IN
1ST APPEAL SAME HE SAID TO ME IF I WANT TO GET COPIES I HAVE TO PAY FEES AND ALSO THEY
ARE GIVING ME INCOMPLETE INFORMATION WHERE I DEMADED ABOUT 60 PAPERS, THEY ARE
GIVING ME ONLY 43 PAPERS, ALSO THEY ARE NOT GIVING ME ANY INFORMATION ON THE TOPICS
RAISED, THE AUTHORITIES ARE SAYING THE RTI ACT ONLY COVERS RIGHT TO INSPECT ANY FILE AND
TO GET THE CERTIFIED COPY OF THE DOCUMENT IF ANY, IF IT DOES NOT RELATE TO 3RD PERSON OR
NOT CONFIDENTIAL AND NOT FILE NOTING, WHERE I TOLD THAT THEM THE GUJARAT
INFORMATION COMMISSION HAD ALREADY MADE ORDER TO GIVE FILE NOTING AND TO ANSWER
THE TOPICS AND GIVE INFORMATION WHICH ARE IN QUESTIONAIRE FORM, STILL THEY TOLD ME
THEY CAN'T DO THAT IF I AM NOT SATISFIED I SHOULD MAKE 2ND APPEAL FOR IF, BUT I HAVE TO
PAY FEES IF I WANT COPIES OF IT,
(4) IN THIS PICTURE NUMBER J3 IT IS THE COPY OF THE NEWS PUBLISH IN THE NEWSPAPER THAT
THE BUILDER BUILT UP 22 SHOPS INSTEAD OF 8 SHOP, BUT I WILL CORRECT IF THAT HE BUILT UP 28
SHOPS INSTEAD OF 8 SHOPS,
(5) INTHIS PICTURE J4 IT IS THE PICTURE OF PURCHASE DOCUMENT OF THE PERSON FROM WHOM I
BOUGHT THE SHOP AND HE BOUGHT THE SHOP FROM THE BUILDER, IN THIS THE DOCUMENT IT IS
CLEARLY WRITTEN THAT THE SHOP MEASURE APPROXIMATE 91 SQ FT, SO IT CAN BE MORE ALSO IN
THE CASE, AND DEFINITELY IT WAS MEASURING IN THE CASE WAS MORE AND HE TOLD THE SAME
WHEN I ASKED HIM,
(6) IN THE PICTURE THE J5 IS THE COPY OF THE RTI APPLICATION WHICH WAS MADE TO WARD
OFFICER, IN WHICH I ASKED AND SEEKED THE INFORMATION (i) WHETHER THE ONE SHOP KEEPER
OF THE SAME BUILDING IN QUESTION HAD BEEN GIVEN ONLY TO KEEP HIS BOARD ON THE OUTSIDE
PART OF THE BUILDING, THEY SHOULD HAVE CHECKED THE REORDS AND WOULD HAVE TOLD YES
OR NOT PERMISSION IS GIVEN, GENERALY NOBODY HOLDS RIGHT TO KEEP BOARD OUTSIDE OF THE
BUILDING AS IT COMES IN TO THE LANGUAGE OF THE HOARDING IF HE HAD MADE CONTRACT TO
THE MEMBERS OF THE BUILDING AND HAVE TO PAY TAX FOR IT, SUCH PERMISSION HAS TO BE
OBTAINED OR NOC FROM THE MEMBERS OF THE BUILDING, FOR SUCH THING OR ACTIVITY, (ii)
WHETHER HE HAS BEEN GIVEN ANY PERMISSION TO KEEP ONLY HIS GOODS ON THE ROAD AND
FOOTPATH OUT SIDE THE BUILDING, THEY SHOULD HAVE CHECKED HIS RECORDS AND WOULD HAVE
ANSWERED YES OR NOT, BUT GENERALY THE NOBODY IS GIVEN PERMISSION TO KEEP GOODS AND
STUFF OUTSIDE HIS STORE ON FOOTPATH OR ROAD, (iii) WHETHER TO KEEP GOODS OUTSIDE
BUILDING ON FOOTPATH OR ROAD IS LEGAL OR ILLEGAL, AND SUCH BOARD IS LEGAL OR ILLEGAL, AS
EVERY BODY KNOWS IT IS ILLEGAL THEY SHOULD HAVE REPLIED IT IS ILLEGAL AS PER LAW, (iv)
WHETHER THEY HAVE AUTHORITY TO REMOVE IT OR NOT, THEY SHOULD HAVE REPLIED IN WHAT
CASES AND CONDITION AND SITUATION THEY HAVE AUTHORITY TO REMOVE OR TAKE ACTION AND I
HOW MUCH TIME YOU WILL TAKE ACTION, (v) THE OWNER OF THAT SHOP OR PERSON SAYS THAT
HE GIVES MONEY FOR THAT, TO CLARIFY THAT WHETHER LEGAL OR ILLEGAL, AND TO WHOM AND
WHICH OFFICE AND OFFICER AND AT WHAT PALCE
(7) IN THIS PICTURE J6 IS THE COPY OF THE NEWS PUBLISH IN THE NEWSPAPER WHERE IT WHEN
THEY CAME TO KNOWLEDGE THAT I HAVE COMPALINED TO CHIEF MINISTER ON LINE PROGRAMME
AND ALSO FILED POLICE COMPALINT TO LODGE FIR AGAINST THE BUILDER, BUT IN THE BOTHE IN C
M ON LINE THE AUTHORITIES LIED AND IN THE SAME THE POLICE DID NOT FILED FIR AGAINST THE
BUILDERS AND INFACT THE BUILDER MADE FALSE COMPLAINT AGAINST ME AND THE POLICE
OFFICER OFFERED ME THAT IF I TAKE MY COMPLAINT AGAINST THE BUILDER THEN HE WILL
CONVIENCET BUILDER TO TAKE HIS COMPLAINT BACK, WHEN HE HIMSELF KNOWS THAT THE
COMPLAINT IS FALSE,
(8) IN THIS PICTURE J7 IS THE RTI APPLICATION MADE TO TOWN PLANNING DEPARTMENT BUILDING
PERMISSION, INFORMATION ASKED, (i) PARTICULAR BUILDING AND ITS BUILDING PERMISSION, (ii)
FOR NOT TAKING ACTION AGAINST THE BUILDING ENCROACHMENT AND ILLEGALITY, (iii) FOR SUCH
BUILDING PERMISSION LETTER WHAT CONDITION, RULES, REGULATION ETC, (iv) WHETHER SUCH
PERMISSION AFTER WARDS THERE ANY CHANGES PERMISSION IS GIVEN OR NOT OR WHETHER ANY
REVISED PLAN IS GIVEN OR NOT, ETC (v) IF YES THAN TO GIVE DETAILS OF THE RULES, REGULATION,
CONDITIONS, ETC DETAILS OF THAT, (vi) WHY NO ACTION WERE TAKEN ON TO OUR APPLICATION
SEND BY REGISTERED POST AGAINST THE BUILDING IRREGULARITIES, ENCROACHMENT, ILEGAL
CONSTRUCTION, ETC
(9) IN THIS PICTURE OF J9 IT IS THE LETTER IN WHICH IT STATES THAT THE REGARDING THE MATTER
WHERE THE BUILDING ENCROACHMENT IS REMOVED AND HAD BEEN INSPECTED, AND AS TO
MATTER TO FRESH MATTER OR APPLICATION IT RELATES TO INTERNAL MATTER WITH THE BUILDER,
AND THE MUNICIPAL CORPORATION AND AUTHORITIES HAD NOTHING TO DO IN THE MATTER, AND
WANT TO MY APPLICATION TO BE FILED AND NOT TO CONSIDER IT, AS I HAVE PROVED THE
BUILDING IS NOT AS PER MAP AND THEY ARE SAYING IT IS INTERNAL MATTER OF ME AND BUILDER
THEN WHAT I AM SUPPOSE TO DO KILL THE BUILDER FIGHT WITH HIM, AS IT IS INTERNAL MATTER
NOBODY HOULD ELSE INTERFER IN IT RIGHT, THIS IS BULLSHIT, THE AUTHORITIES ARE BULSHITING,
(10) IN THE PICTURE OF J10 IS THE FRESSH APPLICATION MADE RIGHT NOW TO MUNICIPAL
CORPORATION NOW FOR WHICH I HAVE RECEIVED REPLY NUMBER COPY OF WHICH IS J2 AFTER 30
DAYS TO DEPOSIT FEES AFTER 40 DAYS, EARLIER THEY SEND ME LETTER IN BETWEEN JUST TO VISIT
OFFICE AND INSPECT FILE,
(11) IN THIS PICTURE J11 IS THE WARD OFFICER REPLY TO RTI APPLICATION MDE TO HIM OF RTI
APPLICATION PICUTURE COPY OF IT IS J5, IN REPLY HE SAYS THAT THE AS INFORMATION ASKED WAS
NOT ON THE BASIS OF THE RECORD SO NO INFORMATION CAN BE PROVIDED, IF I AM NOT SATIFIED I
SHOULD MAKE APPEAL, BUT TO WHOM APPEAL IS NOT STATED, ALSO DEFINETLY THE
INFORMATION IS ASKED ON THE BASIS OF RECORD BUT THEY HAVE REPLIED FALSE AND WRONG,
(12) I THIS PICTURE J12 THE PUBLIC INFORMATION IS GIVING ME REPLY OF MY RTI APPLICATION J7,
IN WHICH EVEN IF I DID NOT ASKED FOR BUILDING PERMISSION I AM GIVEN, BUT NOT PROVIDING
INFORMATION, SAYING THAT NOT ASKED AS PER RECORDS, WHICH IS FALSE AND SATISFACTORY,
(13) IN THIS PICTURE J13 IS THE PICTURE IT SAYS THAT THERE IS ENCROACHEMENT AND I THE
APPLICANT HAD ALSO MADE ENCROACHMENT, AND MATTER OF AIR CONDITION IS INTERNAL, AND
FOR ENCROACHMENT NOTICE OF 260(1) IS ISSUED, TOTALLY UNSATISFACTORY AND FALSE, MY
SHOP HAD NO ENCROACHMENT AND ACTUALLY THE BUILDER DID NOT CONSTRUCTED WALL IN
LEVEL OF COLUMN TO SAVE FEW MONEY,
(14) IN THIS PICTURE J14 IT SAYS THAT THE BUILDING ENCROACHMENT MATTER NOTICE IS ISSUED
OF 260(1) AND THE APPLICANT THAT IS ME HAVE GIVEN OBJECTION WHICH IS NOT ACCEPTED BY
ME SO, NOW FURTHER ACTION WILL BE TAKEN,
(15) IN THIS PICTURE J16 SAYS THAT THE ENCROACHEMNT OF APPLICANT THAT IS ME AND THE
OTHER PERSON HAD MADE, WHICH AFTER INSPECTION(IT SEEMS EARLIER THAT THEY WERE
MAKING PICNIC WHEN THEY WERE VISITING THE SITE, OH YEAH THAT MAY BE TRUE THEY HAD
FREQUENT VISIT IN THE BUILDER OFFICE ONLY, SO MAY RIGHT NOW THEY ARE SPEAKING IS THEIR
SALT) BASICALLY IT DOES NOT SEEM THEM CORRECT TO REMOVE ENCROACHMENT, AND IT CAN
AFFECT THE PERMITED CONSTRUCTION, THIS IS DEFINITELY BULLSHIT, MUNICIPAL CORPORATION IN
THEIR NOTICES WARN EVERY TIME THAT THE CONSEQUENCES IF THEY TAKE ACTION THEY CAN'T BE
RESPONSIBLE FOR THAT, SO THEY DID NOT TO BE ARAID, WHY ARE SO WORRYING NOW,
(16) IN THIS PICTURE J17 SAYS THAT POINT WISE (1) THAT THE MATTER OF BOARD IS INTERNAL AS
WE HAVE ALREADY DISCUSS THAT IT IS NOT INTERNAL MATTER, (2) THE BOARD SUPPORT IS NOT
COVERED IN CONSTRUCTION, IT IS COVERED IN ENCROACHMENT, THE MUNICIPAL CORPORATION
MANY TIME REMOVES THE ENCROACHMENT SUCH AS WOODEN, MUD, CONCRETE, BRICKED, ETC
ALL TYPE OF ENCROACHMENT FROM THE STREETS WHAT IS THIS, (3) IN THIS THEY ARE SAYING THAT
THE PASSGE SHOULD BE OF 6 FEET, BUT IT IS OF 5 FEET BECAUSE ON BOTH SIDE THE
ENCROACHMENT OF 6 INCH, BUT IT DOES NOT SEEM CORRECT TO THEM TO REMOVE
ENCROACHMENT TECHNICALLY, EARLIER THEYSAID THAT IT IS NOT CORRECT BASICALLY, NOW THEY
ARE SAYING IT IS NOT CORRECT TECHNICALLY TO REMOVE ENCROACHMENT, IN THE PASSAGE IT IS
INTERNALL MATTER AS TO REMOVE GOODS AND OUTSIDE THE BUILDING THE GOODS AND
ENCROACHMENT IS REMOVED FROM TIME TO TIME, I HAVEN'T SEEN THEM IN YEARS TO VISITED IN
THE LANE, SO THEY ARE LYING AND FALSE STATEMENTS ARE MADE BY THEM, (4) IN SOME POINT
THEY ARE SAYING THAT THIS IS INTERNAL MATTER SO SHOULD WE SOLVE IT BY FIGHTING ON
STREETS OR WHAT, WE SHOULD KILL EACH OTHER OR WHAT, SOME ONE IS FIXING WINDOW AC IN
FRONT OF MY SHOP AND BLIND OFFICERS WHO EARLIER SAYED THAT IN LETTERS AND NOW THEY
EYES GOT BLIND SO THAT THEY ARE SEEING AND SAYING THAT IT EXHAUST FAN, NOW WHETHER IT
IS LEGAL THAT SOMEBODY FIXING WINDOW AC JUST BECAUSE HE GAVE EXTRA MONEY TO BUILDER
AND GOT IT IN WRITTEN THAT SO HE RIGHTS TO DO IT, IT IS ILLEGAL EVERY ONE KNOWS THAT, (5)
COMMON TOILET USED FOR PERSONAL KEEPING GOODS BY SOME PERSON, THE COMMON PLACE
SHOULD BE OPEN AND SHOULD BE USED FOR COMMON PURPOSE, WHEN IT IS USED
COMMERCIALLY IT SHOULD BE CHARGED WITH COMMERCIAL TAX, (6) IN THIS IT SAYS THAT THE
SHOP ON THE WEST OF MY SHOP IS LEGAL AND IS DIVIDED IN 3 PARTS OF ONE, THEN WHY LATER
ON IT WAS DEMOLISHED, (7) IN THIS THEY SAY THAT THE PASSAGE AND OTS MEASURE AS PER MAP,
THEN WHY IN EARLIER POINT 3 SAID THE PASSAGE IS SMALL BY ONE FEET AND WHY LATER ON THEY
DEMOLISHED THE SOME AREAS OF THE BUILDING,
(17) IN THIS NOTICE COPY J18 THEY ARE SAYING THAT THE I DID NOT GAVE REPLY OF NOTICE OF
260(1) AND EARLIER THEY SAID IN THE LETTER COPY OF J14, THAT I HAVE REPLIED THAT THE I HAVE
GIVEN REPLY WITH THEY HAVE NOT ACCEPTED OR CONSIDERED, WHAT IS THE MEANING OF THAT,
(18) INTHIS COPY OF LETTER OF J21 THEY ARE SAYING THAT THE PASSAGE IS AND OF AND SHOULD
BE OF 5 FEET AND IN EARLIER THEYIN COPY OF J17 THEY SAID PASSAGE IS OF 5 FEET AND SHOULD
BE OF 6FEET, SO WHAT IS THE MEANING OF THAT, THEY CAN CHANGE STATEMENT ANYTIME, OR LIE
ANYTIME OR WHAT,
(19) IN THIS COPY J22 THE OFFICER IS SAYING THAT THE FIRST FLOOR COMMERCIAL USE IS STOPPED,
BUT AS I HAVE GIVEN COPY OF ONE PAPER WHICH IS PROVING THAT THE FIRST AND SECOND FLOOR
ARE STILL IN USE IN J1 COPY, ALSO AGAIN HE IS SAYING THAT THE PASSAGE IS OF 5 FEET BUT
EARLIER HE SAID THAT THE PASSAGE IS OF 6 FEET IN COPY OF WHICH IS J17, ALSO HE IS SAYING
THAT THE LENGTH OF THE BUILDING IS 38 FEET WHERE IN THE COPY OF APPROVED MAP SCAN COPY
J8 IT CLEARLY STATES AND SAY THAT THE BUILDING LENGTH IS 42 FEET AND 9 INCHES, WHERE DID
THE 4 FEET AND 9 INCHES WENT IN SKY, ARE THEY BLIND, IF EARLIER WITH TO MAKE PASSAGE 6
FEET THEY DID ACTION AND DEMOISH MY SHOP WHICH NOW ACTUAL IT SHOULD BE OF 5 FEET
THEN MY SHOP WHICH THEY DEMOLISH WAS LEGAL, ALSO THERI MEASURE DOES NOT TALLY WITH
THE MEASURE OF CITY SURVEY COPY J26,
(20) IN THIS COPIES J27 OF THE PERSON WHO HAD OCCUPIED THE BOARD AND MADE
ENCORACHMENT SHOPS MEASURE 279 SQ FT AND THE ACTUAL SHOP MEASURE SHOULD BE AS
294.5 SQ FT, ALSO THE BUILDING WAS NOT AS PER APPROVED MAP AND THE FIRST AND SECOND
FLOOR WHICH HAD TO BE RESIDENTIAL AND USED AS COMMERCIAL STILL WAS GIVEN COMPLETION
AND OCCUPATION, ALSO IT IS SAYING THAT THE BOARD IS ALSO SOLD TO HIM ALSO HAD PAID
EXTRA MONEY FOR IT, WHICH IS ILLEGAL IN ALL THE WAY,
(21) IN THIS COPY J28 IS ALSO THE COPY OF ANOTHER PERSON PURCHASE DOCUMENT WHO
ILLEGALY PURCHASED THE BOARD AND ALSO SEE HE HAD PAID EXTRA MONEY FOR IT, BUT NOT
ONLY THAT HE HAD PURCHASED THE RIGHT OF SOUTH SIDE OF HIS WALL TOWARDS PASSAGE IN
WHICH IT IS MENTIONED IN THE PURCHASE DOCUMENT THAT HE HAS RIGHT TO DEMOLISH THAT
WALL AND CAN FIX WINDOWS, DOORS, SHUTTERS, WINDOW AC, AND NOT ONLY THAT ETC, ITS
INCLUSIVE, THATS ILLEGAL,
(22) IN THIS COPY OF J31 IS THE COPY OF BUILDING PERMISSION OF THE BUILDING WHICH IT
CLEARLY SAYS THAT THE BUILDING IS TO BE CONSTRUCTED AS PER APPROVED MAP, NOT ELSE, BUT
THE BUILDING STILL WAS NOT CONSTRUCTED AS PER APPROVED MAP, STILL IT WAS COMPLETION
AND OCCUPATION,
(23) FROM R1 TO R14 ARE THE COPY OF FRESH RTI APPLICATION MADE BY ME WHICH IN WHICH I
HAVE RAISED THE TOPICS WHICH ARE IN QUESTION AND WHICH CLEARLY LEAD TO POINT THAT MY
SHOP WAS LEGAL AND HAD NO ENCROACHMENT AND THE BUILDING IS NOT AS PER APPROVED
MAP AND CORRUPTION IS PREVAILING IN THE MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, BUT FOR I DID NOT
RECEIVED PROPER INFORMATION, BUT I RECEIVED THE LETTER TO VISIT OFFICE OF TOWN
PLANNING DEPARTMENT OF BUILDING PERMISSION AND INSPECT FILE AND ASK FOR THE
DOCUMENT COPY WHICH I WANT, WHERE I ASKED FOR 60 PAGES AND WAS SEND LETTER WAY
AFTER 40 DAYS ON 15 OF OCTOBER 2011 TO DEPOSIT FEES TO GET COPIES CERTIFIED OF NUMBERS
43 SO TO DEPOSIT 86 RUPEES, SO INCOMPLETE INFORMATION, WHERE THE TOPICIS WERE
UNANSWRED, EVEN IN FILE INSPECTION I FOUND THAT THE FILE IS NOT MAINTENED PROPERLY,
SOME DOCUMENTS WERE TORN DAMAGED, SOME WERE MISSING, ETC I THOUGH APPEALED FOR
IT, BUT THE APPELLATE AUTHORITY DID NOT CONSIDERED MY ORAL AND WRITTEN PRESENTATION
AND EXPLANATION AND DID NOT GIVE ME FILE NOTINGS/NOTES/OFFICE DOCUMENTS, ETC,
I DON’T WANT TO GIVE INCOMPLETE INFORMATION SO I WOULD ALSO TO ADD THE HOW THIS ALL
STARTED, SO THIS WAS HOW IT STARTED WHEN MY FAMILY BOUGHT ONE SHOP IN THE PARTICULAR
BUILDING NAMED KAMALSRI CHAMBERS ALSO KNOWN AS 24CARATS, IN THE VADODARA CITY, WE
WERE ASSURED AND NOT WORRIED AS THE BUILDING HAD COMPALETION/OCCUPATION
CERTIFICATE ALREDY BEEN ISSUED, BUT WHEN WE TRIED TO FIX THE BOARD ON THE SIDE OF THE
BUILDING BOARD(THE WHOLE BOARD WAS OCCUPIED BY ONE PERSON, WHICH ACTUAL IS THE
SPACE OF THE BUILDING NAME COMMON BOARD), THE ONE PERSON WHO HAD SHOP EARLIER TO
US AND IS RUNNING BUSINESS FROM PAST MANY YEARS AND HAD MONOPOLY IN THAT MARKET
SINCE HE HAD NO COMPETITOR IN THAT AREA, TOOK OUT MY SHOP BOARD WHICH WAS MUCH
SMALLER(2 BY 1 FEET) COMPARE TO HIS BOARD ( 15 BY 4 FEET) WHEN HIS SHOP ONLY IS 9 FEET,
THROWED MY SHOP BOARD AND DESTROYED IT, AND TOLD THAT HE HAD PURCHASED THE RIGHTS
OF THE BOARD ALONE AND NO PERSON CAN KEEP HIS BOARD OUTSIDE, NOT ONLY THAT HE FIXED
THE WINDOW AC IN HIS STORE SUCH THAT THE OUTSIDE EXHAUST PART OF WINDOW AC WAS
DIRECTLY FACING TO MY SHOP AT ONE AND HALF OR 2 FEET DISTANCE, WITH THE EXHAUST OF
HARMFULL AND HOT AIR NO BODY COULD BARELY STAND FOR FEW SECONDS, HOW COULD WE DO
OUR BUSINESS IN THAT SITUATION OR PLACE, WHEN WE ASKED ABOUT IT HE SAID THAT IT IN THE
MAP IT SHOWS THE WINDOW AND HE HAD RIGHTS TO FIX AS MANY WINDOW OR EXHAUST FAN OR
CAN DO ANY THING IN THAT PART OR AREA, WE WERE NOT SATISFIED SO ASKED THE BUILDER AND
HE TOLD US THAT HE HAD SOLD THE RIGHTS OF BOARD AND HAVE GIVEN HIM RIGHTS TO FIX AS
MANY AC OR EXHAUST FAN OR ANYTHING AND NOBODY ELSE HAS ANYRIGHT, BUT AS WE AWARE
OF OUR RIGHTS WE LOOKED IN APPROVED MAP COPY OF THE BUILDING WE FOUND THAT THE
BUILDING WAS NOT AS PER APPROVED MAP CONDITION, WHEN TOLD THE OTHER PERSON AND
BUILDER BOTH GAVE US THREAT THAT IF WE WENT ANY DIPPER IN THE MATTER IT WOULD NOT BE
BETTER FOR US, OUR HEALTH AND WEALTH AND PROPERTY AND LIFE, AS THEY ALREADY HAD
HARRASSED THE PERSON AND RANAWAY FROM THERE, AND HE NO ONE ELSE BUT THE PERSON
FROM WHOM WE BOUGHT THE SHOP, SO WE DECIDED TO FIGHT FOR OUR RIGHTS AND DECIDED
TO COMPLAINT IN THE MUNICIPAL CORPORATION AND POLICE FOR THAT, BUT THE MUNICIPAL
AUTHORITIES EVERY TIME WHEN WE COMPLAINT THEY VISIT THE BUILDERS OFFICE AFTER HAVING
SOME LUNCH OR BREAKFAST OR SNACKS WOULD LEAVE THE PLACE AND DID NOT TAKE ANY
ACTION, I COMPALINED WARD OFFICE, TOWN PLANNING DEPARTMENT, DEPUTY MUNICIPAL
COMMISSIONER, DEPUTY TOWN DEVELOPMENT OFFICER AND TOWN DEVELOPMENT OFFICER,
LOCAL COUNCILLOR/CORPORATORS, MUNICIPAL COMMISSIONER, COLLECTOR, MLA, MEMBER OF
PARLIAMENT, MAYOR, STATE MINISTERS AND DEPARTMENTS, CHIEF MINISTER AND HIS OFFICE,
GOVERNOR, CENTRAL MINISTERIES AND GOVERNMENT, AND PRESIDENT AND MANY OTHERS BUT
AS THE ALL LETTERS WERE SENT TO LOCAL AUTHORITIES THEY WROTE LETTER TO THEM THAT
THERE IS NO FAULT AND SOME FAULT ARE VERY SMALL THAT NO ACTION CAN BE TAKEN IN THAT
REGARDS,
AT LAST I COMPALINT TO CHIEF MINISTER WHO WAS ALSO ANSWERED WITH FALSE REPLY AND
STATEMENTS, BUT THAT TIME WHEN I MET CHIEF MINISTER I SHOWED HIM ALL THE PROOF AND
STATEMENTS SO AS HE WAS SATISFIED AND ORDERED THE COLLECTOR OF VADODARA TO
REINVESTIGATE AND MAKE THE BUILDING AS PER APPROVED MAP AND REMOVE EVERY
ENCROACHMENT AND SEAL THE PLACE WHICH IS APPROVED AS RESIDENTIAL AND USED AS
COMMERCIAL, BUT WHEN HE ORDERED THE SAME THE MY SHOP WHICH WAS MARKED AS ILLEGAL
PART AND ON THE OPPOSITE PERSON WHO HAD ENCROACHMENT WAS MARKED HIS SPACE LESS
THAN HE HAD, AND AFTER THAT THE TOWN DEVELOPMENT OFFICER OFFERED ME THAT IF I TAKE
MY COMPLAINT BACK MY SHOP WILL NOT BE DEMOLISHED AND OTHER PERSONS SHOP WOULD
NOT BE DEMOLISHED, BUT I REFUSED FOR THAT AND TOLD HIM THAT IF HE THINKS THAT MY SHOP
HAD ENCROACHEMENT THAN HE CAN DEMOLISH AND IF EVEN HE THINKS THE OTHERS PERSONS
SHOP IS LEGAL HE IS FREE TO NOT DEMOLISH THEM, AFTER THAT MANY TIMES HE AND BUILDERS
AND OTHER PERSON OFFERED ME THAT I SHOULD NOT INSIST IN ACTION TO BE TAKEN IS I ACCEPT
THERE OFFER IT WOULD BE GOOD FOR ME, THE THEY TOLD ME THAT THE AUTHORITIES WILL ONLY
DEMOLISH SOME PART AND WILL SHOW CHIEF MINISTER THAT THE ACTION IS TAKEN AND LATER
ON THEY CAN MAKE THE BUILDING IN THE SAME POSITION AS IT WAS, WHICH I REFUSED SO THE
OTHER PERSON SHOP FEW PARTS WERE DEMOLISHED AND THE SOME PART WERE LEFT WITHOUT
TAKING ACTION AND STAND WAS TAKEN THAT THE MEASURE OF PREMISES IS MORE THAN
MEASURE THAN THAT PART WHICH MEASURE MORE IS ENCROACHMENT AND SHOULD BE
DEMOLISHED THE OTHER PERSON BUILDING MEASURE LESS THAN IT SHOWS IN THE MAP AND
CAN;T BE DEMOLISH AND MY SHOP WAS STILL DEMOLISH AND I WAS TOLD THAT MY SHOP COMES
IN MARGIN SO IT IS TO BE DEMOLISH WHILE THE MY SHOP WAS LESS THAN IN MEASURE IT SHOWED
IN MAP, I MADE MANY COMPLAINTS LATER ON ONE OFFICER OFFERED AND TOLD ME THAT IF I
WANT MY SHOP IN THE SAME POSITION IT WAS IT WOULD ONLY BE IF I TAKE MY COMPALINTS
AGAINST THE AUTHORITIES BACK AND SHOULD CONSTRUCT THE SHOP IN THE SAME POSITION IT
WAS AT MY OWN COST AND RISK, FOR WHICH I TOLD HIM TO GIVE ME IN WRITTEN AND HE TOLD
ME THAT NOBODY WILL COME TO SEE AND ASK, WHICH I REFUSED AGAIN AND TOLD HIM I WANT
JUSTICE NOT A FAVOUR, I HAD THE WHOLE STATEMENT AND CONVERSATION RECORDED IN AUDIO,
BUT AFTER THIS MANY YEARS I AM COMPLAINING TO ALL OFFICE ON TABLE BUT STILL HAVE NOT
RECEIVED THE JUSTICE.
THIS IS NOT MY STORY THIS IS THE EVERY PERSON STORY OF PEOPLE IN ALL CITY, STATES AND
WHOLE COUNTRY, EVERY PERSON IN WHOLE COUNTRY HAS ONLY ONE DREAM HIS OWN OWNED
HOUSE/HOME AND HIS OWN OWNED SHOP/OFFICE BUSINESS, SOME PEOPLE DO THAT WITH THEIR
HARD EARNED MONEY WITH BLOOD AND SWEAT, SOME DO FOR THEIR OLD AGE AND SOME DO
THAT FOR THEIR CHILDRENS AND SOME TAKE LOANS AND SOME WITH ALL THEIR SAVINGS AND
SOME WHEN EVERY THING IS SETTLED AND SUDDENLY THEY PROPERTY OF THEIR DREAM GET
DEMOLISHED IN FRONT OF THEIR OWN EYES, FOR SOME IT IS DREAM OF THEIR CHILD FOR SOME IT
IS DREAM OF THEIR PARENTS AND FOR SOME IT IS BLESSING OF THEIR PARENTS, BUT EVERY THING
THAT IS MORE VALUABLE THEN JUST MONEY IN VALUE, ITIS THEIR LIFE IS RUINED AND THEIR
LIBERTY TO LIVE WITHB THEIR DREAM, SAME IS MY STORY IT WAS MY FATHER DREAM THAT HE
MADE FROM MANY YEARS THAT HE SAVED ALL THE MONEY ONLY FOR HIS OLD AGE AND HIS
CHILDRENS, IT WAS NOT THE FIRST TIME HAPPENED WITH US EARLIER MY GRAND FATHER BOUGHT
ONE PLOT TO CONSTRUCT HOUSE IN IT BUT THE SAME HAD SOME KIND OF SIMILAR OR OTHER
PROBLEM, WHICH MY GRAND FATHER WAS UNABLE TO SOLVE IN HIS LIVING LIFE, BUT TWITH THE
HELP OF HIS GENEROUS AND GOOD AND HELPULL FRIEND SAME WAS SOLVED, BUT DUE TO
FINANCIAL CRISIS WE HAD TO SELL IT SAME, ALSO NOT ONLY THAT IT DOES NOT END, SAME
HAPPENED WITH US WHEN MY PARENTS MY FATHER AND MY MOTHER WITH THEIR MONSY SAVED
IN MANY YEARS AND SOME LEFT AFTER SETTLING SOME DUES AND SOME LEFT WITH THAT WE
BOUGHT ONE HOUSE WHICH WAS CONSTRUCTED UNDER LAND AND AQUISITION ACT SECTION 21,
WHICH WE BOUGHT ON SIMPLE AGREEMENT PAPERS WITH NOTARISED, BUT THE SAME WHEN THE
LAND ACQUISITION ACT GOT REPEALED OR ABATE THE PROVISION ARISED TO GET PERMANENT AND
CORRECT REGISTERED PURCHASE DOCUMENT PAPER WITH REGISTRAR, BUT THE SAME HAD
SOMEKIND OF PROBLEM, NOW WHEN MY FATHER BOUGHT THIS SHOP AND WHEN WE FOUND OUT
THAT IT ALSO HAD SOME PROBLEM I DECIDED THAT THIS HAS TO END NOW, I DON'T WANT MY
CHILDEREN TO SAY THAT MY GRAND FATHER AND OR MY FATHER LEFT SUCH KIND OF PROPERTY
WHICH HAD PROBLEM, SO TO MAKE THIS END I DECIDED THAT I WOULD NOT STOP UNTILL IT ENDS
AND MAKE ME STOP, EVEN IF IT TAKES THIS MANY YEARS I WOULD NOT STOP UNTILL I GET JUSTICE
FOR MY FATHER, MY MOTHER, MY BROTHER, MY SELF, MY FAMILY AND CHILDRENS.
KINDLY PLEASE CONSIDER THE PROOF AND EVIDENCE OF SITUATION AND FACTS,
WAITING FOR JUSTICE, KINDLY PLEASE HELP IN THE ABOVE CASE.
THE COMPLAINT IS MADE WITH THE RIGHT TO ADDITION AND ORAL REPRESENTATION AND IS
INCLUSIVE.
YOURS FAITHFULLY
JITENDRA MOHANDAS CHANDWANI