The Hindu 02.12.2010
UDA decides to shelve project
Staff Reporter
VIJAYAWADA: The board of Vijayawada Guntur Tenali Mangalagiri – Urban Development Authority (VGTM-UDA) on Wednesday resolved to shelve the Ambapuram township project that failed to make any headway during the last four years.
The board meeting, presided by Krishna district Collector Peeyush Kumar in his capacity as ex-officio chairman, was attended by a representative of the Finance Department, another of the Town and Country Planning, Municipal Commissioner G. Ravi Babu and VGTM-UDA Vice-Chairman G.S.R.K.R. Vijay Kumar. It passed a resolution to shelve the project and the resolution would be sent to the State government, which would have to take a final decision. The Ambapuram Township is one of the most controversial projects taken up by the UDA. Controversies, contradictions, violations, protests and legal wrangles mired the project from the very first day it was conceived in 2006. The UDA, despite vociferous protests and opposition from local farmers and plot owners, was determined to go ahead with the project as it hoped to pocket nearly Rs. 100 crore from its 40 per cent share of the developed land.
With plot owners refusing to part with their lands, the district administration issued a notification for acquisition that was challenged in the High Court. As the Court stayed the notification, the UDA changed its strategy and began negotiating with the farmers. This too failed to meet with any success.
A large number of small plot owners as well as farmers would benefit if the proposal is shelved. In view of recent developments such as Layout Regulation Scheme (LRS), legal and financial implications involved, resistance from the public and so on, the UDA has been toying with the idea of withdrawing the proposal. Stiff opposition from land owners and the LRS have also contributed to this. Many small plot owners of Ambapuram area applied under the LRS to get their plots approved by the UDA, which was hitherto arguing that the layouts were not approved by it, and, hence, the plot owners had no right to oppose the township. Moreover, the plot owners for long have been banking on GO 400 issued in 1996.
