sarabjit, re ur post at:
http://mail.architexturez.net/+/MPISG-Media/archive/msg00581.shtml

# 1. non-security reasons for disallowing recording
devices in court might apply
# 5. Board did not contest my interpretation of Rule-9
 (re Humayun Tomb, see first para in post of Nov 2004,
linked from end)
# 9. AK Jain cannot be on Board. Court appointments
might not bar VC
# 3. DHC rulings on MLU are challengeable because of
SLP in SC

# 2. NGO-Left proximity in Delhi is known fact; slum
issue is DfID driven
# 4. NGO-MCD proximity is known fact; eliminating DDA
is core of DMP-free urban reform (see USAID sponsored
legislative amendment to MCD Act; professional
institutions are co-opted, see GATS revised offer)
# 8. NGO-DDA proximity is not established fact; slums
as vote-banks is basis of NGO-Politician proximity
(these NGOs need VP to pull the crowd to claim
funding, I do not know exactly why VP needs them)

# 7. mpisg has not been denied hearing and is not
serving any notices till refused joint hearings
request or disallowing of our 41(3) application.
# 10. no one else is required to wait. planning law
requires us to wait and we value most our development
rights by which planning law articulates our
fundamental rights.  
# 6. I had asked if NGO-types are above RTI in
yesterday's post:

--- Gita Dewan Verma <mpisgplanner@yahoo.com> wrote:

this IS endgame. when hearings are over dmp2021 will
become de-facto dmp regardless of any delay in
notification.  

I think you see this as a game about DDA, other-side
king that we have to check-mate. I see it is a game
about DMP, king besides which DDA ought to have been
queen, and gnctd, mcd, ndmc, itpi, spa, duac, tcpo,
etc, the 2+ point pieces. all of them are somehow
reduced to pawns for the other side (made of those
who
subvert equity and efficiency and safeguards /
guarantees and are found equally in Govt, NGO,
professions, business, politics, wherever). the game
can not be according to rules till our pieces are
reclaimed. we cannot break the board and walk away,
it
is our board. we cannot drag *them* on to our turf,
they are standing on our turf.
        
for DDA I prefer s.41(3) to RTI (we need
intervention
to heal not information to kill). for sanjhaNGOs
(also
ITPI, PHDCC, etc, which are structurally same), RTI
would be very nice, but I have the impression they
are
above it. They are not?

 

--- sarbajit roy <sroy1947@yahoo.com> wrote:

Dear Gita,

Thanks for a very detailed post.

We are still in middle game (chesswise) and NOT
trapped. When the game is not played by the Rules

-

break the board, walk away and drag them onto your
turf.


...

--- Gita Dewan Verma <mpisgplanner@yahoo.com>

wrote:


An illegal Board has started today illegal

NGO-style

hearings at PHD House and VPSingh/Sajha-Munch,

who

have made illegal demand for their nominee to be

on

Board, plan to protest bureaucratic-style
functioning
outside DDA Vikas Sadan. we are trapped between

two

illegal choices. we know we have been trapped.

what

will we do now? *now*. the endgame has begun.  


...

Do please browse the urls in this post.

http://mail.architexturez.net/+/MPISG-Media/archive/msg00575.shtml

 

 

 

               
__________________________________
Yahoo! Mail - PC Magazine Editors' Choice 2005
http://mail.yahoo.com