[mpisgmedia] Tehkhand (court update)

On 30.05.06 a High Court bench comprising J Ravindra
Bhatt has directed DDA to give petitioner no.2 in
Rajinder Singh & Anr v/s UOI & Ors hearing according
to rules on objections submitted in response to s.11A
Public Notice dated 31.08.05 for change of land use
from District Park to Residential for the Tehkhand
project for which final notification was issued by
MoUD on 23.02.06. The Board is to pass a speaking
order and confirmation of the 450 crore bid by
DLF-Indiabulls is subject to decision after that.

On 03.05.06 J Pradeep Nandrajog had issued notice and
directed that actions pursuant to the bid would be
subject to to the outcome of the petition. On 18.05.06
Respondents (UoI/MoUD, Delhi Govt, MCD and DDA) were
again directed to file counter-affidavits. DDA filed
on 26.05.06, to which Rejoinder was filed on 29.05.06.


On 30.05.06, after DDA counsel pleaded urgency as
bidders have paid 100 cr and are pressing for the bid
to be confirmed, final arguments were heard on first
prayer, viz, quashing of notification dated 23.02.06.
(The other prayers are for declaring the project
illegal and contrary to law and for restraining the
Respondents from implementing yet to be duly approved
and notified policy).

The original case was just that Petitioner no.2 was
not given hearing. DDA had disputed that hearing was
mandatory and alleged that the response was motivated,
but did not dispute that consideration of all
responses is mandatory and also admitted that the
objection was not considered at all. The court noted
the submission on behalf of petitioners that there had
been procedural violation and, in view of the content
of the objection, also substantive violation of the
Act. The direction for hearing was given in view of
the peculiar situation.

===

I believe this is the first post-notification
pre-project order upholding s.11A. The first
pre-notification upholding was the Sultangarhi
judgment. The other post-notification order is the one
allowing the amendment to the metro property
development petition to seek quashing of
notifications. All arose from *peculiar* situations:
ordinary people supporting by due processes the
statutory mandate of DDA for lawful planned
development. The *regular* situation is extraordinary
bigwigs condemning statutory authorities and
frameworks in extra-statutory discourse to advance
pre-ordained reforms, one way or another.

The *regular* item on Tehkhand reported on 30.05.06
was of the Congress-do to celebrate the new Act, where
**Mr. Reddy said development of slum clusters had been
launched in Tehkhand in South Delhi and would be
extended to other parts of the city**
http://www.hindu.com/2006/05/30/stories/2006053015880400.htm

Naturally, MoUD, Delhi Govt & MCD felt no need to
reply to Rajinder Singh & Anr.

Previous post:
http://mail.architexturez.net/+/MPISG-Media/archive/msg01063.shtml




__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com

Partial thread listing: