Expert team points out irregularities in building plan

The Madras High Court today said the officer investigating the collapse of the under-construction building in June which claimed 61 lives should look into the irregularities pointed out by an expert team if the same pertained to the original plan.
The court, which went into the report submitted by the experts, made the observation during resumed hearing on PILs, including one demanding CBI probe, related to the collapse.
"If there was any deficiency on the part of the officials in the matter and the reports submitted before the court by the experts was with regard to the original plan approved by CMDA officials, then certainly there are grave deficiencies on the part of authorities concerned," bench comprising Chief Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul and Justice R Mahadevan said.

State Advocate-General A L Somayaji said whether the CMDA had approved the original plan or a 'modified plan' had to be clarified by the officials concerned.
P Wilson, senior counsel for petitioner, and DMK leader M K Stalin contended that there was no such a thing as 'modified plan' and that CMDA officials had cleared only the original plan which did not submit crucial details while applying for the building plan.
Referring to shortfalls pointed out by experts who had analysed the documents, the judges said if such irregularities pertained to the original plan, then officer investigating the case must look into it.

Opening up the possibility of the investigating officials filing supplementary/additional charge sheet in the case, the judges said: "We are conscious of the fact that the statements recorded under Section 161(3) of Cr PC would have been placed before the magistrate, who, of course, can always examine whether any accused are required to be added (in the charge sheet) or not."

Wilson charged officials with trying to protect the second building which stood just next to the collapsed building.
Noting that it too was as precarious as the fallen building, he said it too must be pulled down.
To this, Somayaji said 'Block A' which was still standing had been issued demolition notice by the authorities.

However, the notice had been challenged in the High Court and the matter was scheduled to come up for hearing on December 11.
The bench then asked the registry to post that case also before it in the next hearing on January 8, 2015.