Demand for action against MCD

MASTER PLAN IMPLEMENTATION SUPPORT GROUP

A synergy platform of citizens' groups with legitimate stakes in benefits of planned development

Secretary, MoUD

Sub: MCD decision to auction weekly markets (news report, reproduced): Demand for action against MCD for deliberate violation of s.21 of Delhi Development Act

Ref: WP 6980/2002, my letters of 07.09.04 (encl.1) and 16.10.04 (encl.2) and GNCTD letter of 25.10.04 (encl.3) to MCD Commissioner and others about CVC intervention

Sir,

1. 21 of Delhi Development Act, 1957, governs “Disposal of land by the Authority or the local Authority concerned”. s.21(3) clarifies disposal includes “creation of any easement right or privilege” and s.21(1) clarifies disposal can only be for development according to Plan. In view of explicit Master Plan provisions for weekly markets, disposal of other sites for them is in clear violation of s.21.

I had sought in letter of 07.09.04 directions against MCD / GNCTD illegal ideas and for enforcing Plan solutions for hawking (assured by DDA in WP 6980/2002 in January 2003) and. In letter of 16.10.04 to MCD Commissioner I had set out how MCD ideas are cognisable offence under DD Act and not valid under MCD Act. This was copied to you with request to reply in WP 6980/2002 and specific reference to Annexure-P/F thereing about dubious origin of MCD proposals. As per GNCTD letter of 25.10.04 CVC’s (confidential) letter about Master Plan provisions for hawkers was forwarded to, among others, MCD Commissioner, who was thus also aware of the CVC intervention. (MCD is also well aware of the long-standing demand of hawkers and others, including RWAs, for DMP solutions, including by its presence in the Board for hearing of s.11A Public Notice of 15.09.2002 for Master Plan modification to allow Sultangarhi scheme in ridge area, contentions of hawkers’ response to which are reiterated with reference to subsequent PIL and CVC intervention in their response to s.11A Public Notice of 18.09.2004 for commercial IT Park on riverbed, all reiterated again in response to s.11A Public Notice of 07.11.2004 for commercial use in Mahipalpur Hauz). These communications leave no scope to consider the MCD approval an inadvertent lapse.

Accordingly, we seek action against MCD for its deliberate attempt of disposal by auction of public land in violation of law and in disregard of CVC reference, PIL and cautionary advice. We also urge you to expedite reply in WP 6980/2002, next listed for hearing on 05.01.2004.

Yours sincerely

sd/-

Gita Dewan Verma

MPISG Planner

To support planned development. To oppose unplanned development. To protect our future.

Related: Letter of 19/11/2003, included in addition to response to Public Notice for industries, 09/12/2004