Chairman, DDA

Sub: WP 8523/2003 and WP 4978/2002

Sir,

In continuation of our letter of 23.09.04 (encl), this is to bring to your attention that work on ridge area projects, started despite WP 4978/2002, progresses despite notice in WP 8523/2003. Pictures of two sites are here...

A news item in Pioneer (23.10.04) says Biodiversity Park (sub-judice) is “to be opened to the public in a year’s time” and another quotes, “Supreme Court's refusal to grant stay on … Akshardham temple on the Yamuna river bed cleared all doubts about the location of Games village”, much like the plea DDA used about a Malls PIL to delay the instant matter in High Court. It is unfortunate that authorities choose to read in court’s refusal to grant stay in other PIL permission for willful projects on riverbed / ridge, while refusing to read in High Court order of 16.09.02 against Sultangarhi project prohibition against identical illegalities, despite also objections in response to s.11A Public Notices of 15.09.02 (Sultangarhi) and 18.09.04 (metro IT Park). We urge you for inquiry as per WP 4978/2002 and for directions in view of WP 8523/2003 as well as for expediting transparent disposal of responses to related s.11A Public Notices.

Thanking you,

Gita Dewan Verma | MPISG Planner

cc: as in encl (Sub: WP 8523/20031) 

• 1. Sub: WP 8523/2003
  Letter about illegalities wrt notice in PIL, 23.09.04

  http://skel.architexturez.net/node/22667