The matter in which sewa nagar residents have moved
court against manushi-mcd model-market was part heard
today and is listed on 12/05/05.
MCD and Manushi counsels raised some objection about
not having been served copies of some
counter-affidavits but the court was not inclined to
adjourn. Counsel for the petitioner put forth the
following arguments:
* Supreme Court Order (in name of which approval /
direction is claimed) says, on the contrary, the court
was surprised as to why MCD had approached it and that
it is not be construed as a direction.
* Policy (with which consistency is claimed) says that
if local residents object such development cannot take
place.
* about MCD-Manushi MoU, MCD itself has written to
Manushi about breach of conditions by building pucca
constructions
* impression of concurrence of authorities is not
borne out by minutes of meetings filed by MCD, which
indicate meetings were only between MCD & NGO
* in the only meeting in which others were present,
DJB said it could provide water if funds for laying
pipes were provided and L&DO and CPWD said they had no
problem as long as the project was not on their land
(L&DO counter affidavit has letters by which it raised
objections after start of project)
* the project reduces right of way, contrary to MCD
mandate
Madhu Purnima Kishwar was in court, sitting behind the
counsels for other respondents, commenting to them
about the submissions of the counsel for the
petitioners, reminding us of the power that the
un-elected and unqualified few wield!
For five years we have read about Kishwar and her work
on hawkers; for five months no one has reported on
this case from the perspective of those who have
challenged it. After one of them called at 9 to ask if
I could suggest an architect since their counsel has
suggested a drawing and they had failed to find one
all evening I passed on the request and felt like
posting this account.
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail - Find what you need with new enhanced search.
http://info.mail.yahoo.com/mail_250
court against manushi-mcd model-market was part heard
today and is listed on 12/05/05.
MCD and Manushi counsels raised some objection about
not having been served copies of some
counter-affidavits but the court was not inclined to
adjourn. Counsel for the petitioner put forth the
following arguments:
* Supreme Court Order (in name of which approval /
direction is claimed) says, on the contrary, the court
was surprised as to why MCD had approached it and that
it is not be construed as a direction.
* Policy (with which consistency is claimed) says that
if local residents object such development cannot take
place.
* about MCD-Manushi MoU, MCD itself has written to
Manushi about breach of conditions by building pucca
constructions
* impression of concurrence of authorities is not
borne out by minutes of meetings filed by MCD, which
indicate meetings were only between MCD & NGO
* in the only meeting in which others were present,
DJB said it could provide water if funds for laying
pipes were provided and L&DO and CPWD said they had no
problem as long as the project was not on their land
(L&DO counter affidavit has letters by which it raised
objections after start of project)
* the project reduces right of way, contrary to MCD
mandate
Madhu Purnima Kishwar was in court, sitting behind the
counsels for other respondents, commenting to them
about the submissions of the counsel for the
petitioners, reminding us of the power that the
un-elected and unqualified few wield!
For five years we have read about Kishwar and her work
on hawkers; for five months no one has reported on
this case from the perspective of those who have
challenged it. After one of them called at 9 to ask if
I could suggest an architect since their counsel has
suggested a drawing and they had failed to find one
all evening I passed on the request and felt like
posting this account.
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail - Find what you need with new enhanced search.
http://info.mail.yahoo.com/mail_250