Residents of Sushant Lok 1, 2 and 3 in Gurugram have asked the Haryana government for a one‑time composition framework to regularise minor building violations across the three established residential colonies.
Details of the request
The petition seeks a defined window during which qualifying properties could be brought into compliance by paying prescribed composition charges. It focuses on technical irregularities such as covered cut‑out areas and slight differences from the mandated front and rear setbacks. These are presented as minor, not major, breaches of construction rules.
Under the suggested scheme, owners would submit applications, remit the fee and receive a certificate confirming that the identified irregularities have been regularised. The intent is to avoid individual enforcement actions that could otherwise arise from these technical lapses.
Potential revenue for the state
Authorities estimate that regularising the listed irregularities could generate roughly INR 40 crore for the state. The figure reflects the aggregate composition fees that would be collected if the scheme were applied to all eligible units in the colonies.
Beyond the fiscal upside, a streamlined process could reduce the administrative burden on local officials, who currently must address each case separately.
While the numbers look tidy, the real impact on the market is less certain. Property owners often face delays when documentation does not match the on‑ground reality, and a clear pathway to compliance could smooth future transactions.
Related: Jassper Shipping invests $50m in logistics and bulk
Challenges and next steps
The proposal remains a plea; there is no indication that the state has formally approved the framework. Officials have yet to announce whether they will adopt a specific composition model for the three colonies or continue with case‑by‑case enforcement.
If accepted, the mechanism would outline the categories of minor irregularities eligible for regularisation, the applicable charges and the procedural steps owners must follow. Failure to act could leave thousands of residents exposed to enforcement notices and potential legal complications.
Critics argue that a one‑time window might encourage laxity in future construction, but supporters point out that the colonies are already established and the deviations are largely technical.
In a broader sense, this move reflects a tension between strict regulatory enforcement and the practical realities of aging residential areas. Offering a limited‑time regularisation path can provide certainty for buyers while still preserving the integrity of building codes, albeit in a softened form.
As of now, the request is awaiting a decision from the state authorities. Homeowners and prospective buyers alike are watching for any official statement that could clarify the path forward for the colonies.
