This is with reference to the letter "Apartment Buyers Beware" which appeared in Star of Mysore of 23-1-11. In that letter Sri. K.N. Krishna Prasad has suggested that complaints against architects who bend the rules and defraud consumers should be filed before the Council of Architecture.
Such a case has been filed, but the results are not encouraging. One may recall that Siddhartha Youth Association held a press conference on 16-4-06 and accused the then MCC Commissioner, A.B. Ibrahim and the Deputy Director of Town Planning Kempaiah of issuing a CR on 16-3-06 to Brigade Splendour apartment building on Lalit Mahal Road even though the building had not yet been completed and several building bylaws had been violated in the portions that had been completed. The press conference was widely covered in the local media, but MCC did nothing to correct the lapse.
But the Council of Architecture, New Delhi which is a statutory body set up to regulate architects in the country issued a show cause notice to Asima Shahid (of Venkataramanan Associates, Bangalore), the architect who had given the certificate on 2-3-06 based on which MCC had issued the CR to Brigade Splendour. In the certificate, Ms. Shahid had stated that the construction of the building had been COMPLETED under her supervision and that no building bylaws had been violated. She had also stated that the residential building was fit for use and had requested MCC to issue the CR. But reports in the local media in Mysore had made it clear that the building was not complete even on 16-4-06, the day of the press conference.
After conducting hearings on the matter (in which the architect failed to appear despite notices from the Council), the Council gave its verdict on 25-11-10 in which it held the architect guilty of professional misconduct under Regulation 2(1)(viii) and (x) of the Architects (Professional Misconduct) Regulations, 1989 for issuing incorrect architect's report for the building. As punishment, it cautioned the architect "with further direction to ensure that this act is not repeated."
It is very surprising that the Council just cautioned the architect, especially when she did not appear for any of the hearings and did not submit any statement of defence or of contrition. In the past, the Council has revoked architects' licences for professional misconduct. In 2009, it revoked for a period of one year, the licence of a well-known Delhi architect, Hafiz Contractor for appearing in a commercial (But this order was stayed by the Delhi High Court since the Council had not issued a show cause notice to the architect and afforded him a chance to defend himself). Is appearing in a commercial more serious misconduct than giving a false certificate?
B.V.Shenoy, Mysore Grahakara Parishat