VIOLATIONS: WHAT THE SC SAID

The sanction given for the second revised plan (2009) was in clear breach of the building regulations, since it violated the minimum distance to be maintained between buildings (16 metres)

Even when this issue was highlighted by the chief fire officer, it received no response from NOIDA officials and led to no investigation. This violated fire safety norms, which require a mandated amount of space for fire tenders to operate

The plan sanctioned by NOIDA was contrary to: (a) the building regulations; (b) the mandatory distance between building blocks; and (c) the movement space required, as a result of which the rights of the apartment owners and the safety of their apartment blocks have been seriously affected

— SUPREME COURT in its Aug. 2021 order

Construction of the two skyscrapers appears to have begun before permissions were granted; the work began in July 2009, five months before the second revised plan was passed. Second, the foundations constructed were for 40-storey buildings (for which permisson was granted only in 2012), not for the 24 storeys allowed in 2009

The plan revisions to develop the skyscrapers obliterated a garden that was supposed to sit adjacent to an existing tower; permission was not sought from the RWA to make this change. This violated the UP Ownership of Flats Act and UP Apartments Act