I have dispatched today the following to the
Monitoring Committee about its reported amnesty for
mis-user NGOs and Trusts.
===========
Sub: Request for information / clarification
Ref: News item 'NGOs to be exempted from sealing',
Express Newsline, 27.09.06 (Encl.1) and prior
representation dated 02.05.06 (Encl.2)
Sirs,
As per the item under reference, the Committee has
decided "NGOs and trusts which are registered in India
or abroad, and function from residential premises,
will not be sealed".
This is to request you to kindly either refute this
news item or disclose (or indicate the public
authority that must disclose) in ambit of section
4(1)(c) and 4(1)(d) of the Right to Information Act,
2005, the relevant facts and reasons for this decision
affecting public in general and, in particular,
persons who had filed in response to statutory Public
Notice dated 21.07.06 objections/ suggestions on the
proposal to modify the Master Plan provisions for
'Mixed Use'.
In my prior representation under reference, which I
had submitted in person after discussion, I have
already brought to your notice the fact that
objections/suggestions duly filed in response to prior
Public Notices dated 15.02.02 and 18.04.05 in the
matter of Mixed Use have yet to be duly disposed off.
I have lately also sought clarifications concerning
disposal of my duly filed response to the Public
Notice dated 21.07.06.
The Public Notice dated 21.07.06 was for a proposal to
implement the Tejinder Khanna Committee's
recommendations (based inter alia on views received
from NGOs, RWAs, MTAs, etc) to substantially expand
the scope of 'Mixed Use' in terms of both range and
scale of permissible use activities as encoded in the
Plan. For obvious reasons, users defined on other
basis (such as NGOs and Trusts) were not mentioned in
either the Public Notice or in final notification
dated 07.09.06 (on eve of which a number of NGOs had
engaged in extra-statutory lobbying for exemption from
action against misuse for themselves, on fuzzy grounds
patently extraneous to the rationale of the Plan and
Act).
The grounds on which the Committee has now granted (if
it has granted) exemption to mis-user NGOs and Trusts
have a bearing on the planning process and, with
apparent reflexivity, on its examination by the
Hon'ble Court in the instant Plan modification.
Besides in view of my duly filed response to the
Public Notice dated 21.07.06, as a qualified planner I
am affected by any variances in duly defined planning
process. My request is made in this perspective and I
hope you will respond to it at the very earliest.
Yours sincerely...
cc: for information wrt representation dt 02.05.06 and
hearing dated 25.08.06
* DDA Vice Chairman
* MCD Commissioner
* az plan
Encl.1...
http://cities.expressindia.com/fullstory.php?newsid=202837
Encl.2...
http://mail.architexturez.net/+/MPISG-Media/archive/msg01033.shtml
========
In covering letter of copies to DDA VC and MCD
Commissioner, I have also requested again in context
now of this development the separate hearing of
objections/suggestions on commercial use proposals of
draft MPD-2021 that was to be held by the Board's
decision dated 16.01.06, as *I am personally aware of
a number of responses that capture how the shrill
advocacies of NGOs and NGO-friendly experts have
shaped the overall trend of legislating problems (and
attendant inequity and spatial and financial
inefficiency) by abandoning mandatory Plan solutions
and entitlements for, especially, small and informal
trade, neighbourhood amenity and economic integration
of existing communities. I am also aware of some
amount of awareness about the pioneering provisions of
Delhi Master Plan 2001 in regard to informal sector
and expect there would also be responses indicating
the trend of 'privatization of extortion from hawkers'
that has distinctly emerged from subversive NGO
interventions since 2001*.
Incidentally, one of our RTI matters on this lot was
heard on Friday. The decision, specifically referring
to the Board decision of 16.01.06, is now up at
http://www.cic.gov.in/CIC-Orders/Decision_22092006_12.pdf
More was revealed about the murky NGO business of
hawking hawkers. I had referred to that in passing and
at length to the businesses of mixing up land uses and
participatory committee-fication of the planning
process in a talk on Saturday, notes of which are
uploaded at:
http://plan.architexturez.org/site/gdv/planning-and-equity
- gita
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
Monitoring Committee about its reported amnesty for
mis-user NGOs and Trusts.
===========
Sub: Request for information / clarification
Ref: News item 'NGOs to be exempted from sealing',
Express Newsline, 27.09.06 (Encl.1) and prior
representation dated 02.05.06 (Encl.2)
Sirs,
As per the item under reference, the Committee has
decided "NGOs and trusts which are registered in India
or abroad, and function from residential premises,
will not be sealed".
This is to request you to kindly either refute this
news item or disclose (or indicate the public
authority that must disclose) in ambit of section
4(1)(c) and 4(1)(d) of the Right to Information Act,
2005, the relevant facts and reasons for this decision
affecting public in general and, in particular,
persons who had filed in response to statutory Public
Notice dated 21.07.06 objections/ suggestions on the
proposal to modify the Master Plan provisions for
'Mixed Use'.
In my prior representation under reference, which I
had submitted in person after discussion, I have
already brought to your notice the fact that
objections/suggestions duly filed in response to prior
Public Notices dated 15.02.02 and 18.04.05 in the
matter of Mixed Use have yet to be duly disposed off.
I have lately also sought clarifications concerning
disposal of my duly filed response to the Public
Notice dated 21.07.06.
The Public Notice dated 21.07.06 was for a proposal to
implement the Tejinder Khanna Committee's
recommendations (based inter alia on views received
from NGOs, RWAs, MTAs, etc) to substantially expand
the scope of 'Mixed Use' in terms of both range and
scale of permissible use activities as encoded in the
Plan. For obvious reasons, users defined on other
basis (such as NGOs and Trusts) were not mentioned in
either the Public Notice or in final notification
dated 07.09.06 (on eve of which a number of NGOs had
engaged in extra-statutory lobbying for exemption from
action against misuse for themselves, on fuzzy grounds
patently extraneous to the rationale of the Plan and
Act).
The grounds on which the Committee has now granted (if
it has granted) exemption to mis-user NGOs and Trusts
have a bearing on the planning process and, with
apparent reflexivity, on its examination by the
Hon'ble Court in the instant Plan modification.
Besides in view of my duly filed response to the
Public Notice dated 21.07.06, as a qualified planner I
am affected by any variances in duly defined planning
process. My request is made in this perspective and I
hope you will respond to it at the very earliest.
Yours sincerely...
cc: for information wrt representation dt 02.05.06 and
hearing dated 25.08.06
* DDA Vice Chairman
* MCD Commissioner
* az plan
Encl.1...
http://cities.expressindia.com/fullstory.php?newsid=202837
Encl.2...
http://mail.architexturez.net/+/MPISG-Media/archive/msg01033.shtml
========
In covering letter of copies to DDA VC and MCD
Commissioner, I have also requested again in context
now of this development the separate hearing of
objections/suggestions on commercial use proposals of
draft MPD-2021 that was to be held by the Board's
decision dated 16.01.06, as *I am personally aware of
a number of responses that capture how the shrill
advocacies of NGOs and NGO-friendly experts have
shaped the overall trend of legislating problems (and
attendant inequity and spatial and financial
inefficiency) by abandoning mandatory Plan solutions
and entitlements for, especially, small and informal
trade, neighbourhood amenity and economic integration
of existing communities. I am also aware of some
amount of awareness about the pioneering provisions of
Delhi Master Plan 2001 in regard to informal sector
and expect there would also be responses indicating
the trend of 'privatization of extortion from hawkers'
that has distinctly emerged from subversive NGO
interventions since 2001*.
Incidentally, one of our RTI matters on this lot was
heard on Friday. The decision, specifically referring
to the Board decision of 16.01.06, is now up at
http://www.cic.gov.in/CIC-Orders/Decision_22092006_12.pdf
More was revealed about the murky NGO business of
hawking hawkers. I had referred to that in passing and
at length to the businesses of mixing up land uses and
participatory committee-fication of the planning
process in a talk on Saturday, notes of which are
uploaded at:
http://plan.architexturez.org/site/gdv/planning-and-equity
- gita
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com