To: MCD Commissioner

Dear Sir,

Please refer to my request of 22.01.06 for information
about action plan for compliance in Vasant Kunj of
recent orders against building law violations (made
under s.4(1)(d) of RTI Act in view of area-specific
judicial / quasi-judicial matters):
http://mail.architexturez.net/+/MPISG-Media/archive/msg00874.shtml
In para-2(c) I had specifically requested the
information before any action. I assume my request has
been refused, as press has reported on 05.02.06 MCD
decision to start with select schools, reportedly on
basis of 10-day survey / visual inspections by area DC
pursuant to calls from some area residents.

======
Firstly, I seek confirmation of refusal of my RTI
request, with the following:

(1) Confirmation that no action plan for comprehensive
systematic compliance of order of 18.01.06 in tandem
with area specific orders, etc, has been prepared /
published under s.4(1)(c) of RTI Act for Vasant Kunj /
Mahipalpur-Mehrauli area.

(2) Confirmation that show-cause notices have NOT been
issued in respect of the constructions instanced in
para-3 (a) to (e) in my RTI request (viz, Delhi Govt
Mandi & Super-speciality ILBS, farmhouse misuse
TVB-SHS, Malls & commercial complex in Masudpur,
mega-housing near MCD school at Rangpuri Pahari),
which mentions violations on school sites in para-3
(f)).

(3) Particulars of the callers who influenced MCD
priorities and of the procedure under which they did
so (since your Public Notice of 03.02.06 invites
citizens to furnish information only of builder
constructions, to area DC).

(4) Particulars of the recent administrative / legal /
judicial instrument that authorises action by MCD in
Vasant Kunj area, in view of the following:
(a)
In WP 8954-59/2003 (Master Plan Implementation Support
Group & Ors v/s DDA & Ors, PIL for rectification of
violations on school sites impeding the statutory
neighbourhood school plan) MCD stated in its
counter-affidavit that necessary action has to be
taken by DDA.
(b)
Final order of 27.10.04 directed action against
violations in 12 weeks, noting that Delhi Govt was
giving illegal permissions and DDA had issued to
schools show-cause notices, filed in its affidavit of
26.10.04 with field inspection report (indicating
substantial violation in Delhi Govt school, DPS, etc,
not mentioned in MCD list in which are mentioned at
least two schools then under construction). In
pendency of compliance, MCD started levying on schools
misuse charges for parking on roads and commercial
property tax rates. I had written to then MCD
Commissioner on 01.03.05 to object to pay-and-violate
measures, with reference to letters for compliance for
rectification of violations that Delhi Govt had
forwarded to him on 23.02.05 for action and ATR to me.
I got no ATR.
(c)
In counter-affidavit of April 2005 in WP 8523/2003
(Shiv Narayan v/s DDA & Ors, PIL for enforcement of
Plan entitlements of area villages being jeopardised
by illegal projects) MCD again stated, including in
reply to para-11 mentioning the above PIL about
schools, that the area is development area under DDA
and even prayed for deletion from the array of
respondents on this count. In my letter of 01.03.05 I
had referred also to letters, in context of this PIL,
about pay-and-violate policy for farmhouses and
mega-housing construction near MCD school, forwarded
by Delhi Govt on 11.01.05 for action and ATR to me. I
got no ATR.
(d)
The lackadaisical role of MCD vis-a-vis its obligatory
education functions, its pay-and-violate measures in
disregard of order of 27.10.04, etc, are set out in
responses to MPD-2021 Public Notice that await
disposal by a Board of Enquiry & Hearing of which you
are a member and also in my subsequent interventions
filed for protection of relief granted by order of
27.10.04 (viz, rectification of violations inclusive
of illegal policies, in perspective of the statutory
solution that they impede) in sub-judice NGO matters
in which MCD is a Respondent and has at no stage
proffered any suggestion to assist the court in the
matter of rectification of violations in schools.    
(e)
MCD has again said Vasant Kunj is "development area
and therefore the building activities are governed by
DDA and not by the MCD" - in RTI reply dated 30.01.06
by DC Nazafgarh to an RTI request by an area resident
about building permissions for a primary school
constructed by a builder trust and being misused as
college of architecture by the same (TVB-SHS,
para-3(c) in my RTI request).  

========
Secondly, kindly accept as an Appellate Authority for
purposes of RTI Act in MCD the Appeal, enclosing this
communication, against RTI reply of 30.01.06. The
reply itself does not mention, and the information on
MCD website does not clarify, concerned Appellate
Authority. Moreover, the RTI request specifically
mentioned current court orders and media propaganda
supporting USAID-sponsored MCD Amendment Bill /
building byelaw reform (in which matter you are deemed
PIO by transfer to you of my RTI request by MoUD PIO)
and the applicant has objected to the unauthorised
building, etc, also in response to MPD-2021 Public
Notice (for which you are on Board of Enquiry &
Hearing that has yet to hear him).

========
Lastly, I reiterate my request of 01.02.06 (in which I
reiterated my RTI request about action plan for Vasant
Kunj area) for reply now to my RTI request of 21.12.05
in the matter of the USAID sponsored MCD Bill:
http://mail.architexturez.net/+/MPISG-Media/archive/msg00913.shtml
Refusal of my RTI request about Vasant Kunj, RTI reply
from area DC, yesterday's episode of NDTV's
We-The-People about (MG road) demolitions, MCD choice
for start of compliance in Vasant Kunj, etc, all
suggest that court orders against violations of the
existing building regulatory regime are being used not
to serve the purpose of statutory solutions that
violations are impeding but purposes of reform
sponsored by big-fish USAID. Its supporters seem to
have amnesty for real-space violations as well as
space in the discourse about violations while ordinary
citizens have only shabby treatment to show for their
sustained pursuits, by constitutional processes, of
reform for enabling statutory solutions and effecting
non-adversarial non-arbitrary rectification of
impeding violations. In rejoinder to MCD
counter-affidavit in WP 8523/2003 on behalf of the
petitioner I had sworn that MCD while claiming no role
in the petition is actively subverting its grounds
through pursuit of USAID-sponsored reform and from its
position in MPD-2021 Public Notice / Authority of the
DDA. I had said the same in my representation against
the USAID-sponsored Bill (which MCD forwarded to USAID
consultants for their consideration and necessary
action). Now MCD has declared intent to arbitrarily
deploy show-cause notices and bulldozers for the same
subversion in the area in which I reside. I do press
my Right, at least, to Information.

Yours truly
Gita Dewan Verma
Planner & resident of Vasant Kunj