Requests for views of "official" NCMP minders

PMO

(sent to Deputy Secretary to PM)

Dear Ms Vidyavathi,

After CVC letter of 10.09.04 to GNCTD about Delhi Master Plan (DMP) provisions for hawkers was copied to you in PMO, I have taken the liberty of writing to you also in related matters, especially industries and DMP violating projects in the ridge / riverbed. Before that I have written also to PM in the context of NCMP.

My letters are part of broader professional engagements in support of lawful planned development. “Consensus” against DMP in the matter of industries in 2000 had led me to write a book (Slumming India). I intend now to write a sequel on the peg of my recent chronicles of the fate of NCMP-DMP opportunities, posted on my NCMP-DMP minder, at .

I would be grateful if you could let me know if and how I might have:

(a) PMO’s view on my chronicles, especially of developments relating to Manufacturing, Commerce (informal sector) and Facilities (education and health) and, in view of Commonwealth Games, perhaps also in other sections of my minder.

(b) Information about mechanisms of / public documents about NCMP minding in PMO.

I do look forward to hearing from you,

Best regards

Gita Dewan Verma, Planner

UPA-Left CC

(sent to Mr Sitaram Yechury, Member, Politburo, CPI-M)

Dear Mr Yechury,

I understand that what you wrote about Delhi’s institutional land scam of 2002 refers to the phrase ‘Great Terrain Robbery’ from a planner’s book. The planner is I and in the book (Slumming India) the mechanisms of the phrase are illustrated by the industries’ imbroglio, on which your Politburo issued this month a statement that national leaders reiterated at a rally and in UPA-Left CC. Since then “consensus” against the Plan has again crystallized.

Among various peculiarities of this “consensus” is the demand for an “ordinance” to change the Plan, even as law requires s.11A process inclusive of Public Notice, such as the one issued amidst industrial closure for “regularizing” the metro IT park under construction on the riverbed. It is through this process (viz, Public Notice for household industries, arising from the instant court order) that I had made the suggestion that government defend, in debate with me, any alternative plan for compliance against the option of compliance through the statutory solution that neither requires nor permits the kind of closure that is ongoing. The “consensus” demand for an “ordinance”, among other things, takes away my right to object, suggest, seek debate, be heard – leaving, like stated in my preface to my book, development experts like myself with little to do beyond chronicle.

My chronicles of the fate of opportunities arising from convergence between NCMP commitments and Delhi Master Plan solutions are posted on an NCMP-DMP minder on the web, at . I intend now to write a sequel to my book and would be very grateful if you could let me know if and how I might have: (a) the view of Left in UPA-Left CC on my chronicles, especially of the industries’ affair (in section on Manufacturing), and, since it is not clear from the quote in The Hindu report of 15.10.04 if Left approves of “regularizing” Plan violations like Akshardham on riverbed and mega-housing in ridge, perhaps also the one of metro property development Public Notices (in section on Infrastructure) (b) copies of Left documents, such as Politburo statement, note of 12.10.04, press releases, discussion notes / essays, etc, relating to the industries’ affair.

I do look forward to hearing from you.

Best regards,

Gita Dewan Verma, Planner

National Advisory Council (sent to OSD to NAC)

Dear Mr Shrivastava,

I had written to you the letter under reference about two letters written to (and kindly forwarded by) NAC Chairperson. These related to Delhi Master Plan (DMP) issues in the context of National Common Minimum Programme and of the very sympathetic hearing that Mrs Gandhi had given us last year on the same broad issue.

These letters, etc, are part of professional engagements in support of lawful planned development and, since May-June, of NCMP-DMP opportunities, chronicles of the fate of which are posted on the minder at .

“Consensus” against DMP in the industries’ matter in 2000 had led me to write a book (Slumming India). I intend now to write a sequel based on my NCMP-DMP chronicles and would be grateful if you could let me know if and how I might have:

(a) NAC’s view on my chronicles of, especially, developments relating to Facilities (education and health) and Manufacturing, about which letters were kindly forwarded

(b) Information about mechanisms of / public documents about NCMP minding in NAC.

I do look forward to hearing from you,

Best regards,

Gita Dewan Verma, Planner