Cooperative Societies Bill � in conflict with DDA Act?

The Delhi Cooperative Societies Bill is to be
presented in a special session of the Assembly on
Monday. I think there is a conflict between the Bill
and Delhi Development Act.

Under Delhi?s land policy all land was cheaply
acquired and placed at disposal of the state for
development according to Master Plan. No private land
development was envisaged except via cooperatives.
Cooperative societies were allotted land at reasonable
rather than market rates with explicit purpose of
facilitating low and middle income housing supply.
Original members have in many cases sold their flats
and the Bill, like the freehold policy for DDA flats,
seeks to ?regularise? these transactions, contrary to
purpose of the land policy. Since the land policy is
part and parcel of Delhi Master Plan, this amounts to
a Plan modification, possible only by due process of
s.11A of the Act explicated further in the statutory
provisions for Plan monitoring and review in the
Master Plan. This due process includes consideration
of planning data, consultation with various
authorities, opportunity for public scrutiny and
comment by due process of Public Notice, etc. The
state legislation is effectively scuttling the
mandatory process required by the central Act to
condone and liberalise transactions in housing stock
meant for low and middle-income groups.

Indeed, current housing dynamics are displaying a
striking twin trend ? a thrust on creation of
exclusively up-market fresh stock and liberalization
of regulations to allow even existing stock to become
progressively more up-market. This is unsustainable
besides being entirely unacceptable from the equity
premise of the land policy as well as the governance
absurdity that repeatedly and continually rewards the
culprits and makes the law-abiding feel like fools.

Sreelatha Menon has done a report in Indian Express on
25.07.03 that has also the Managing Director of the
National Cooperative Housing Federation conceding the
Bill involves a change in the land policy and is
inconsistent with what is going on through the
plot-cancellation surveys in resettlement areas. He,
however, justifies the Bill on grounds of revenue
raising by the government. This classic defence is
patently ludicrous. Land was vested in the state for
equitable and sustainable planned development and not
for raising resources out of unplanned development
that the state failed to check. Carried to its logical
conclusion this illogical premise will allow us to
commercialise Tihar jail by regularizing all crime for
revenue raising and allowing commercialization of all
our land also for revenue raising. And god knows what
we do with all our revenue raising since budgets just
lapse year after year while we chase loans and push
reforms for more revenue raising for god knows what.






__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
The New Yahoo! Search - Faster. Easier. Bingo.
http://search.yahoo.com



Partial thread listing: