Urban News

  • Increase font size
  • Default font size
  • Decrease font size
General Administration

Thane Municipal Corporation permits builder to construct on disputed plot

Wednesday, 18 December 2013 11:44 administrator
Print PDF

The Times of India         18.12.2013

Thane Municipal Corporation permits builder to construct on disputed plot

THANE: It has come to light that the Thane Municipal Corporation (TMC) has granted illegal sanction to a developer to construct a commercial building on a land that is under dispute and belongs to a tribal woman at Shivaji Nagar.

The first slab of the multi-story building has been joined with an adjacent wall of a 25-year-old structure that houses Navodaya School, posing a risk to the lives of hundreds of students. The cracked building wall of Hiramati Shopping Centre is being used to integrate the new structure.

The developer in question is Sundar Shah of Dil-Well Developers who does not have the 7/12 extract of the land belonging to 72-year-old Kamlabai Keru Bagad. The construction of the building is on at survey no. 455/2, Panchpakhadi, Shivaji Nagar, Wagle Estate. Kalmlabai's husband, Keru Bagad (who is no more), had won the civil court case in 1990 against then builder Ratilal Shah for ownership rights of the land. This prompted Shah to appeal in the district court the following year and the case is still pending.

In the meantime, Sundar Shah claimed to have purchased the disputed land from Ratilal's brother on which he started the construction work. Kamlabai could not fight the powerful lobby and got support from local activists who began fighting the case to release her land. "I am illiterate and a single woman so the current builder took advantage and commenced construction work on a part of my plot in connivance with various agencies. I was shocked to know that he obtained the commencement certificate (CC) on a disputed tribal land," said Kamlabai. A town planning official of the TMC said, "We can't hold the CC for so long. He had all papers cleared and we issued it more than a year after he applied."

Interestingly, the CC was issued in October when the work commenced last monsoon.

"We had asked for demolition of the structure which had no CC. But the TMC did not act on our plea and gave permission," said activist Sudhir Shetty, who is pursuing the case on behalf of Kamlabai.

Sundar Shah said, "I have all clearances for the construction. There is no litigation and dispute on the area I am constructing the structure. I am not concerned with the court case and the plot in question. Kamlabai has her plot at the backside of my building and I intervened to resolve the matter with the society members but she is not ready to compromise."

Activist Shetty said the local police had prevented the builder from constructing the structure a few months ago after they challenged the move. However, the builder managed to get the documents cleared from the TMC to continue construction last month. "It's a clear violation of construction norms and court order. The builder does not have 7/12 extract and name on health card," he said.

I have all clearances for the construction. There is no litigation and dispute on the area. I am not concerned with the court case. Kamlabai has her plot at the backside of my building and I intervened to resolve the matter with society members but she is not ready to compromise.

 

Water Board Seeks Share of GHMC Fees

Wednesday, 18 December 2013 07:41 administrator
Print PDF

The New Indian Express               18.12.2013

Water Board Seeks Share of GHMC Fees

In this connection the water board wanted the state government to work out a suitable formula to ensure that infrastructure development fee is spent on water supply and sewerage also.
In this connection the water board wanted the state government to work out a suitable formula to ensure that infrastructure development fee is spent on water supply and sewerage also.

The Hyderabad Metropolitan Water Supply and Sewerage Board (HMWS&SB) whose financial health is weak, wants a lion share of 25 per cent from infrastructure development fee collected by the Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation (GHMC) for taking up water and sewerage infrastructure development in Hyderabad.

Faced with acute financial problems, the water board has taken up the issue with the state government and wanted them to see that 25 per cent of infrastructure development fee collected by the GHMC is released to the board. In the recently held board meeting, chief minister N Kiran Kumar Reddy directed the chief secretary P K Mohanty to hold meetings between the two civic departments to sort out the issue.

The water board officials told Express that the board is finding difficult to arrange funds for implementing various developmental activities, whereas the GHMC is collecting infrastructure development fee, impact fee, etc, but not spending on infrastructure development for water supply and sewerage in the Greater Hyderabad limits.

They said that the GHMC is collecting developmental charges and betterment charges between Rs 275 and Rs 400 per sq. mt for sanctioning building permission to residential and commercial buildings. The GHMC is collecting about Rs 400 crore per annum under the above heads.

The GHMC is collecting impact fee (as per GO Ms 766 of 2007) and city level infrastructure impact fee for high rise buildings from Rs 200 to Rs 400 per sq. ft depending on road width. Also value addition charges are being collected for Cyberabad Zone.

In this connection the water board wanted the state government to work out a suitable formula to ensure that infrastructure development fee is spent on water supply and sewerage also. For a 267 sq. yds plot with 446 sq. mts built up area for residential purpose charges to be paid to GHMC are about Rs 1.22 lakh and for 15 mm connection charges are Rs 23,000. For an MSB in 500 sq. mt plot with built up area of 1,000 sq. mt for residential purpose, an amount of Rs 5.75 lakh has to be paid to the GHMC while Rs 2.25 lakh has to be paid to water board for 20 mm connection. For high rise buildings charges to be paid to the GHMC increase further, whereas charges levied by water board remain the same, they said.

The GHMC officials said that though the issue came up for discussion in the last board meeting, no decision was taken.

 

HC to BMC: Bear maintenance cost of shaky heritage buildings

Wednesday, 18 December 2013 07:06 administrator
Print PDF

The Indian Express               18.12.2013

HC to BMC: Bear maintenance cost of shaky heritage buildings

THE Bombay High Court Tuesday suggested that the Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation (BMC) should bear the maintenance cost of dilapidated buildings in heritage precincts of the city.

The court was hearing a petition filed by Federation of Churchgate Residents (FCR) that sought the demolition of a 14-storey residential tower under construction by Vasant Sagar Properties (VSP), claiming that it is a threat to the heritage precinct of Marine Drive.

Advocate general D J Khambata told the court that those living in heritage structures should be given incentives to maintain the structures. Khambata, however, clarified that he had expressed his personal view and the state government has not considered the issue so far.

Making his submissions in favour of conservation of the heritage precinct, Khambata said that Mumbai had a large number of Art Deco structures and it is second only to Miami. A Division Bench of Chief Justice Mohit Shah and Justice M S Sanklecha inquired whether the buildings near the Oval Maidan also formed a part of the heritage precinct. "Some of the buildings are dilapidated. The corporation should spend for their maintenance," Chief Justice Shah remarked.

Concurring with the court, Khambata said that residents of such buildings should be given tax exemptions. "They should be made to feel proud of living in heritage structures. There are no incentives for the owners to beautify these structures. That should be done," Khambata said.

To encourage private owners and tenants to conserve and maintain heritage structures, the BMC's Mumbai Heritage Conservation Committee (MHCC) had, in August, recommended that the state government extend financial incentives, such as tax benefits and concessional interest rate on loans, to such properties. Besides, trusts and charitable institutions donating money to such properties should be allowed income tax deduction, the committee has said.

The VSP had contended that as per a Government Resolution of September 4, 2009, special permission is required from the Municipal Commissioner (MC) for reconstruction of old buildings under Regulation 33 (6) of the DCR. Under 33 (6), permission from the heritage committee is not required as the MC can grant permission for buildings higher than 24 m.

FCR's counsel Aspi Chinoy, however, argued that the entire skyline from Nariman Point to Girgaum Chowpatty comprised of buildings upto 24 m high, and an over 50 m highrise would be "completely destructive to the heritage precinct".

The BMC's counsel V A Thorat said that there was nothing arbitrary about the discretion exercised by the MC in granting the sanction for construction of the building, as it was within his powers. He also said that the state government had not yet defined the boundaries of the heritage precinct. The court has reserved its judgment in the case.

 
More Articles...


Page 110 of 686