s.11A public notice for master plan modification (saying land use of area
measuring 12.19 acres in Zone 'D' bounded by railway line / Metro station in
the North, Pragati Maidan Complex in the East & South, Mathura Road in the
West is proposed to be changed from 'Recreational to Govt. Offices) that is
published under the 15-May date on
<> is for termination
of the Ghar of Appu, mascot of the 1982 Games. (Appu, Kuttinarayanan, also died
on 14 May 2005:

DOC is site lessee and had sub-leased to Intll Amusement Ltd. Bit of Appu Ghar
already got taken last year by DMRC (which, incidentally, has informed me that
it is NGO). The Govt-offices now proposed are for Supreme Court of India and
the proposal has reco even of Prez of India.


of my objection/suggestion======


S.11A(2) notice is published on DDA website (and not on MOUD website).
<>. Despite CIC Decisions (in my cases against MOUD & DDA) for
compliance with S.4(1)(c)&(d) (r/w S.4(3)) of RTI Act, S.11A public notices
continue to fail to indicate details of projects (while their 30-day time
restriction renders S.6 of RTI Act ineffective for obtaining details). In
violation of S.4(1)(b) of RTI Act, MOUD & DDA have also not published the rules
etc by which MOUD & DDA officers deal with (ie disregard) public objections
/ suggestions. Govt's indifference to public opinion on S.11A exercises is
evident. In this case the Congress-led Central Govt's proposal, or perhaps
'sacrifice' for 'Govt offices', is of termination of the Appu Ghar that Sh
Rajiv Gandhi inaugurated in 1984 on birthday of Smt Indira Gandhi in continuing
expression of Pt Nehru's love for children. Such a proposal could hardly have
come about without concurrence of all who count and it does appear that public
objections to the proposal will not count.

Nevertheless, I do OBJECT. As a qualified planner with considerable experience
of engaging MOUD & DDA on their S.11A exercises, I object to this proposal
for patently impermissible land use change from Recreational being advanced in
ad-hoc manner in pendency of holistic Zonal Plan preparation (O-Zone) and
modification (D-Zone) exercises (and despite uncertainty about the process by
which MPD-2021 has been simultaneously notified under s.11A(2) and brought into
operation under s.11). As average citizen with fond memories of fun-filled
times at Appu Ghar, I object to this public notice itself for being in
violation of RTI Act and failing to disclose its meaning and import to the average
citizen of Delhi to be able to express his/her views on Central Govt's proposal
to terminate Appu Ghar for 'Govt Offices'.

3. In
view of near certainty of my objection being ignored, I SUGGEST that:

a. The
final notification disclose full details of, including particulars of all Govt
Officers involved in, the careful consideration (typically claimed in
notifications) that found merit in the proposal to change land use from public
Recreational (Appu Ghar) to 'Govt Offices'. (I believe such exercises of Govt
Officers are historic and ought to be recorded in detail in the Gazette of

& DDA suitably inform (by letter, or in spirit, of the RTI Act) along side
the processing of this S.11A exercise to terminate Appu Ghar for 'Govt Offices':
(i) All affected citizens who might wish to take last rides, photographs, etc;
(ii) Appu Ghar about alternative site at Shastri Park (where DMRC amusement
park tender is stayed in my writ petition in which MOUD & DDA are parties)
and DMRC of the sterling opportunity for corporate-responsibility / PR gesture
by way of return of excess land that it took at Shastri Park to the DDA to
enable DDA to effect compensatory land use change to relocate Appu Ghar.


Dewan Verma


Cc: For

1. Jt.Secy.(D&L),
MOUD, Nirman Bhawan, N D - 110011

C.O.O., International Amusement Ltd, Gate No.9, Pragati Maidan, N D - 110001

M.D., DMRC, NBCC Place, Bhishma Pitamah Marg, Pragati Vihar, N D - 110003



Need Mail bonding?
Go to the Yahoo! Mail Q&A for great tips from Yahoo! Answers users.