Roop's Law Assist
Waitlist

[BIHAR ACT 40 or " 1982]1

1982 · State unknown · central · act_text

Download PDFBack to ActsSubordinates

Sections (95)

14 · ?ower of the Authority to implement schemes of other ai1f'f.10r;:lee body corporate and a Department oi Government in case of their fnih.1,::; I implement s.::nem"J.-(1) 'where the Authority is satisfied that any directk given by it under sub-section (1) of section 13 with rogard to any dsvelopme project has no1 bee · i carried out by tho local nuthority, body corporate and olhi agencies referred lo therein or that an} ' such loc . authority, body corporate < departmeni of Government is unable to fully implornc~1l any scheme undertake by it for the development of anv part 01 ihe area , lhe Authority may itsell ur:de take any works and incur any expenditure for 1ile execution ol such developrner project or implementation of such scheme , as the case may be, anc recover th cost thereof from the local authority, body corporate or any other agencies .
54r · /w oroviso 2i . 2 of Modified Building 8y8 tawsmulti-storeyed apartment constructed after rnal<ing major deviation from the sanction . plan-ag2ii1ist sanction to build upto the height of 6 floors . construction were made upto the height of nine floorsthe provisions made in the bye laws either about . !'luor area ratio or thA area and height limitations are not without significance -11'",ar;c provisions have been made after taking into consideration various factors rn~e density of population . state of availability of inlrastn .cture and also potential for development!he front set back available instantb is sufficient only for a ou!idin!J of heighl of 21.0 mt. while the construction 01 ihe building had been made more than 31 mt. tor which front set back wc:..s inadequate -the devia'.ion2/ shortfalls cannot be met oy acquiring adjacent land since the front and set -backs, of lhe building would not change oven on obtaininq land to rear of the buildin9 in question -impugned order for depositing condonation/ compounding iee and also to remove deviations I meet shortfalls upheld Mis Seket I-lousing Uc'. vs . Patna , qogional Dev Authonty, ~ 003(L!) PLJH , 832
78 · Notice to be given io suits · . .'. -fi) . No suit shall be instituted again~1 ·1ri0 Autho~i1y or any member thereof or any of its officers or other employees or Pny person acting under the directions of tho Auihority or any member or any ofiicer or otho, employee of the Authority in respect of any action purporting to "lavo been done in pursuance . o . this Act or any rule or regulation made thereunder 1ill the expiration of two months from the date on whic.:h notice in wri1ing has r-:ieen in tho case of the Authonty, 1e1t at the office .or place of abode, m the p"rsrm to be and unless such notice slate elcplicitly the cause o ~ action, the, nature o . relief souqht, the amount of compensation claimed and the name and place of residence of the ir 'lding plaintiff and unless the p!aint contains a statement that such notice h, been so lofl or delivered.

Subordinates (0)