Response to Public Notice; Addition to response: Gita Dewan Verma

Mr S.Mukherjee

Under Secy, MoUD (Delhi Division), Nirman Bhawan, New Delhi - 110011

Sub: Response of 02.12.041

to Public Notice K-13011/5/2000-DIB of 04.11.04: Addition

Ref: News reports about MCD proposals

Dear Sir,

As per news reports today, MCD Commissioner’s proposal to bring urban and rural villages within the purview of building byelaws has been approved. The proposal reportedly arises from court orders about that 1963 exemption notification that, as far as I know, applies only to urban villages and arose from Master Plan requirement of special regulations for them. MCD is reportedly only now making area-specific byelaws and it is not known if this exercise (basis and details of which are not available even on request) has progressed to drafting special building byelaws for urban villages. For other regulations for them as per Master Plan Development Code (permissibility of use activities in use premises, of use premises in use zones, etc) no exercise seems underway. Nevertheless, the news reports about MCD proposal mention decisions / proposals about permissibility of industrial units in villages.

The MCD proposal interferes with / frustrates the following:

  • WP 8523/2003, a PIL seeking on basis of demands made since 2001 within ambit of the holistic context of Master Plan provisions for integrating urban villages into planned development comprehensive scheme / regulations for development / redevelopment of urban villages. (DDA, MoUD, GNCTD, MCD, etc, are parties and have not filed reply).
  • s.11A Public Notice of 04.11.2004 for Plan modification to articulate lawful options for redevelopment (so far precluded by focus on illegal “regularization” / relocation). MCD did not inform details of this even though order of 07.05.2004 had directed it to “consider within three months the aspect of withdrawal of exemption notification”).

The connection between the 1963 notification and the matter of non-conforming units is, in any case, tenuous. In the enclosed2 letter of 19.11.2003 I had raised some specific points and requested that counsel be instructed to work closely with planners. This request was made in view of precedent unfortunately set by MCD Commissioner for an NGO to obtain Court’s approval for its patently illegal ideas for hawkers. As per another news reports today, MCD has approved extrapolation of that idea to illegal policy to auction weekly markets in violation of the Master Plan, regardless also of the fact that implementation of Plan solutions for hawkers has been sought in a PIL sub-judice in High Court and also by CVC.

I reiterate the concerns about obfuscation and undue interference jeopardizing the sanctity of s.11A process and lawful solution-seeking nature of PIL that I have expressed in my response of 02.12.2004 to Public Notice of 04.11.2004 and seek with urgency:

  1. consideration and hearing of the suggestion that I have made u/s.11A
  2. (to be able to refine my suggestion) map / details with reference to Master Plan Land Use Plan of location of industrial clusters, GNCTD development / closure and now also villages that MCD proposes to regulate (availability of this data is mandatory for on-going Plan revision u/s.7 and access to it is required by s.11A)

I would be grateful if you could reply by next week. I also assume that no objections on basis of MCD proposal will be considered, also since 30-days from date of Public Notice have elapsed and no extension was mentioned even in the late publications in newspapers.

Yours sincerely

sd/-

Gita Dewan Verma, Planner

cc: CVC (for information, in context of MCD hawker “policy”)

Encl. Letter of 19/11/2003 to Secretary MoUD cc DDA Vice Chairman3 

Related: Demand for action against MCD for approval of proposal to auction weekly markets4, 09/12/2004