letter to dgtcp haryana and stp gurgaon 09.01.2014 with annxs p

2

DTCP Memo No. RL-20/DS(R)/2013/ 60197 dt 11.12.13 in

the matter.

2. Kind request is made to adjudicate this matter seeking

cancellation of license for serious violations of statute and

rules etc by giving personal hearing on any of the following

dates, 22, 23, 27, 28, 29, 30 January, 2014. In the interests of

equity and justice, till such time the appellant/complainant is

heard Senior Town Planner, Gurgaon may kindly be

directed to place on hold any action on DTCP Memo No.

RL-20/DS(R)/2013/ 60197 dt 11.12.13 directing Senior Town

Planner, Gurgaon to “report regarding violation done by

applicant vis-à-vis approved building plans.”

3. The documents attached in support are listed below with

point or points sought to be established therefrom being

mentioned in remarks column which briefly explains most of

the intricate key issues involved:

Ser Document Remarks Page

1 Statement of objects

and reasons of

Haryana Act 10 of

1983

Solving housing problem

and control of building

activities and ownership

rights in Group Housing.

14

2 Haryana Gaz. Extra

No 3/3/82 dt 18.09.86

P. 1079-80

Governor of Haryana

appoints that Act 10 of

1983 shall come into force

on the date.

15-

16

3 Haryana Govt.

Notification No.

17714 dt 10.11.97

Governor of Haryana

appoints that Act 10 of

1983 shall come into force

on the date.

17

4 DTCP Memo No.

STP(Enf.)-98/1367 dt

15.12.98

Implementation of various

provisions of Haryana Act

120 of 1983

18-

22

3

5 DTCP Memo No.

5DP(III)1478-82 dt

03.02.99 with letter dt

15.12.98

Implementation of

Haryana Act 10 of 1983

23

6 Draft Haryana Govt.

Notification No.

DTCP-99/ dt (In

partial modification of

No. 17714 dt 10.11.97

Governor of Haryana was

to notify applicability of

Act 10 of 1983 under

various Haryana Acts. (not

published)

24

7 Statement of objects

and reasons of

Haryana Act 10 of

2002 for amending

Haryana Act 10 of

1983

In order to add new users

in addition to existing

“residential properties,

which are submitted to the

provisions of this Act”, to

appoint two additional

competent authorities and

to make the Act

mandatory.

25

8 Order dt 11.08.08 of

CTP-cum-FAA

Haryana under RTI A

Matter of direct

registration of AOA under

Act 10 of 1983 .. to be

examined

26-

28

9 Order dt 17.06.09 of

Sh SS Dhillon, DTCP

Haryana Memo No.

DS-2009/5216 dt

17.06.09 at Page 15

Since payment of cost of

development of

community facilities by the

apartment owners could

not be substantiated by any

documents their ownership

cannot be considered in

favour of AOA.

29-

44

10 Order dt 03.01.12 of

Sh KK Jalan AA of

DTCP Haryana at

Page 18

“..cost of development of

community facilities,

…schools, dispensary..,

commercial centre etc by

the apartment owners is

substantiated - upon a

reading of the declaration

it is clear..the apartment

owners have been charged

for such facilities

45-

62

11 Affidavit of STP

Gurgaon dt 07.12.13

filed on behalf of

DTCP Haryana at

Page 2

Preliminary Submissions

Para 2 admits that

approved building plan

(ANNEXURE D-1) clearly

specifies 496 dwelling

units and 88 EWS flats

(For 56 service personnel

as per sanctioned plan)

63-

73

4

12 DTCP Haryana

Minute Sheets from

10.05.12 to 02.07.12

in SLP DLF Ltd Vs.

Manmohan Lowe at

Noting Sheets 4 & 5

Opinion given by DGTCP

Haryana dt 17.05.12 that

Community Centres,

Schools, Dispensaries etc.

should vest in the

Apartment Association.

CM Haryana approved the

same on 27.06.12.

74-

76

13 HUDA Memo No.

CTP(H)/DTP(N) -

17370-414 dt

28.09.06

“All the violations not

covered by the

composition rates listed

above are non-

compoundable except

minor variations in Public

Health Services such as

construction of

underground water tank etc

which are to be ignored.”

77-

79

14 Haryana Govt. DTCP

Notification No. Leg.

25/2010 dt 30.09.10

New sub-section (7) added

to Section 3 of Haryana

Development and

Regulation of Urban Areas

Act, 1975 vide Act 16 of

2010 for grant of

“completion or part-

completion certificate on

such terms and conditions

and after recovery of

infrastructure

augmentation charges, as

may be prescribed:”

80-

81

15 Haryana Govt. DTCP

Notification No. PF-

51 dt 29.03.11 to

amend Haryana

Development and

Regulation of Urban

Areas Rules, 1976

New Rule 16-A (2) “The

Director… shall decide to

conduct an independent

audit of books of

account…….After…the

Director shall decide as to

the grant of such

exemption…or refuse to

issue such exemption, by

means of a speaking

order..”

82

16 Unitech letter dt

07.04.11 for renewal

of Lic. 60 of 1996

Reason given is “required

only for miscellaneous

jobs”

83-

84

17 DTCP Memo No. RL-

20/LC-238-JE(B)/

2011/10032 dt 22.7.11

Not submitted documents

in compliance of Rules 26,

27 & 28

85

5

18 Haryana Govt. Memo

No. PF-68/2012/5/38/

2012-2TCP dt

14.06.12

Governor of Haryana

pleased to prescribe

composition rates for

compounding violations of

delay in submission of

accounts

86-

87


20/DS(R)/2012/12351

dt 12.07.12



27 & 28 for last one year

88


27.11.12 for

completion certificate

Applied LC VII without

reference to non renewal of

license due violation of

license conditions qua

Rules 26, 27 & 28

89-

90

21 DTCP Haryana

Minute Sheets from

26.04.11 to 06.12.13

in Lic. 60 of 1996

Sector 47 Gurgaon

LC-238

Gross delay in license

renewal. Appears to be

erroneous grant of license

renewal from 01.05.11 to

30.04.15 after request for

final completion since no

provision exists for

exemption from

submission of accounts in

re Rules 26(2), 27 & 28.

See also Items 4, 5 & 6 of

Haryana Govt. Memo No.

PF-68/2012/5/38/ 2012-

2TCP dt 14.06.02

91-

114


20/DS(R)/2013/37305

dt 22.04.13



27 & 28 for last two years

115

23 DTCP Memo No.

DS(R)-LC-

238/2013/38921 dt

07.05.13

Proposed rejection of LC

VIII due non compliance

of Rules 26, 27 & 28 etc.

Hearing at 11 AM on

24.06.13 for LC VIII

116


07.06.13

EWS advertisements of 7

Unitech projects - details

117


20/DS(R)/2013/42460

dt 11.06.13

Hearing scheduled for

20.06.13 postponed to 11

AM 05.08.13 for LC VI

118


20.06.13

Wrong and incorrect Deed

of Declaration sought to be

filed. Waiver of Rules 24,

26, 27 & 28 wrongfully

sought whereas only delay

in submission of accounts

is compoundable qua

119-

126

6

period of delay. Water has

not been provided as yet.

Sewer connection is non

functional as yet.

Electricity connection is

not Bulk Domestic as yet

and industrial rates of over

Rs 9 per unit are being

charged by DHBVN.

Hence completion can not

be given to Unitech


22.06.13

Regarding renewal of

license and final

completion

127


30.07.13/01.08.13

LC VI renewal to 30.04.15

saying development works

have been completed and

renewal is only for

(unstated) miscellaneous

works

128-

129A


20/DS(R)/2013/50119

dt 30.08.13 with

DTCP Order dt

30.08.13

License renewed upto

30.04.15 in clear violation

of mandate of Rules 26, 27

& 28 – delay in submission

of accounts is compounded

but non-submission of

accounts is not at all

compoundable

130-

131


20/DS(R)/2013/60197

dt 11.12.13 to STP

Gurgaon

STP directed to “report

regarding violation done

by applicant vis-à-vis

approved building plans”

132

4. Certain additional points are now given regarding the

violations of builder/developer/colonizer/licensee:

(a) The Uniworld Garden DTCP Haryana Lic. 60 of 1996

(i) Per sanctioned plan Towers 1 to 8

T-1. 66

T-2. 58

T-3. 70

T-4. 62

7

T-5. 54

T-6. 70

T-7. 62

T-8. 54 (Total 496)

(ii) As built Towers 1 to 8

T-1. 72

T-2. 62

T-3. 70

T-4. 62

T-5. 54

T-6. 70

T-7. 62

T-8. 54 (Total 506- not as per sanctioned plan- Well settled

that extra floors beyond sanction are non-compoundable.

(b) Area of Dwelling Units

(i) Per Sanctioned Plan (sq m.)

Gross 92548.172

Shops 50 (non-saleable)

EWS 2188.588 24.87x88

(reduced 1653.62 sq m 18.58x89)* (non-saleable)

Community Centre 1004.144 (non-saleable)

496 Apartments 89305.44 (saleable)

i.e. 961275.72 sq ft

* As per Indian Express, Delhi, Page 3 advertisement dated

06.06.13 (From sanctioned D.U. Area of 24.87 sq m the built

8

area is “super area” of 18.58 sq m. Super area is disallowed

vide IS 3861 of 2002

(ii) EDC on 13.081 acres at Rs 36.6025 lacs per gross acre

or Rs 4,78,80,000

1079671 sq ft sold to first 496 buyers and EDC recovered:

1079456 sq ft x Rs 44.36 per sq ft = Rs 4,78,84,668

(Per plan sold for 496 Nos could only be 100284.75 sq m)

(iii) Actually Built 506 flats

Extra area: 2 floors x 671.597 sq m. or 1343.194 sq m.

2 D.U.s 284.380 sq m.- Total excess: 1627.574 sq m.

506 Apartments 90933.014 sq. m or 978794.78 sq ft

(c) Financial details:

(i) Average Rate: Rs 1826 per sq ft (including Rs 44.36 per sq

ft as EDC.) Total Rs 197 crores were admittedly recovered by

Unitech from first 496 purchasers. In addition Unitech

admittedly received Rs 7 crores from10 dis-entitled purchasers

without informing them of the fact that only 496 apartments

are sanctioned till date on the file of DTCP.

(ii) Unitech mis-sold 109962 sq ft against 961275.72 sq ft

sanctioned. Built 2 extra floors being non-compoundable.

EDC 1099962 sq ft x Rs 44.36 = Rs 48,79,4314

(Unitech mis-sold 102189.82 sq m against 89305.44 sq m)

5. As per Indian Express, Delhi, Page 3 advertisement dated

06.06.13 (received from Unitech vide Diary No. 51128 dated

20.06.13) (From sanctioned D.U. Area of 24.87 sq m the built

9

area is “super area” of 18.58 sq m. The D.U. Area calculated

as per Statute is actually 14.86 sq m. which violates the

minimum norm under Rules/Statute. Super area is anyhow

disallowed vide IS 3861 of 2002 under National Building

Code of India 2005 read with Disaster Management Act, 2005

( brought into force on 07.05.07) as per mandate of Clause

6.2.1 & 6.4.1 of National Disaster Management Policy, 2009.

Extract of National Disaster Management Policy, 2009 is as

below:

“6.2.1 In view of the construction boom and rapid

urbanisation, municipal regulations such as development

control regulations, building bye-laws and structural safety

features need to be revisited. These regulations will be

reviewed periodically to identify safety gaps from seismic,

flood, landslide and other disasters and suitable modifications

will be made to align them to the revised building codes of the

Bureau of Indian Standards (BIS). Undesirable practices

compromising safety during disasters, that tend to crop up

from time to time, will need to be addressed in the regulations.

The utilisation of unsuitable areas for construction, without

necessary safeguards further enhances vulnerability and needs

to be guarded against through appropriate compliance

mechanisms. Similarly, the introduction of suitable regulations

for rural areas will also be emphasised. Where required, local

bodies will be provided with suitable financial incentives for

10

the preparation of appropriate regulations. This process will

involve an all inclusive exercise involving due sensitisation of

governmental organisations at all levels, local authorities and

the community at large to accrue maximum results thereof.

xxxxx

6.4.1 Hazards like earthquakes and cyclones do not kill people

but inadequately designed and badly constructed buildings do.

Ensuring safe construction of new buildings and retrofitting of

selected lifeline buildings, as given in the Earthquake

Guidelines, is a critical step to be taken towards earthquake

mitigation. The design and specification of houses being

constructed, under the Indira Awas Yojana (IAY) and other

government welfare and development schemes, will also be

reexamined to ensure hazard safety. Building codes will be

updated every five years as a mandatory requirement and also

put in the public domain. Observance of the National Building

Code should be made mandatory in all the State/ Municipal

building bye-laws.”

6. That the names of 10 persons excluding first 496 purchasers

who were allotted Unitech Customer ID Nos lying between ID

Nos 603006 to 603508 and ID Nos 6030071 to 6034951 have

now been ascertained. These persons are disentitled for

allotment as they fall within the mischief of well settled law

established in Jayantilal Investments vs Madhuvihar Co-

Operative Housing (2007) 9 SCC 220 & Madhuvihar Co-

11

operative Housing Society, Mumbai v. Jayantilal Investments

2011 (1) Mh.L.J. 641) read with Harsukh Jadhavji Joshi vs

Ramesh Himatlal Shah AIR 1974 Bom 87, (1973) 75 BOMLR

649, Ramesh Himmatlal Shah vs Harsukh Jhadavji Joshi

(1974) 76 BOMLR 375 & Ramesh Himmatlal Shah vs

Harsukh Jadhavji Joshi AIR 1975 SC 1470, 1975 SCR 270):

Cust ID Name Twr Flat Area Mobile

6035001

SUNDEEP KHANNA earlier HEMANT KUMAR earlier SAROJ SACHDEVA

1 003 1800 9810007285 0

N.A. UMESH CHANDRA SAHOO

1 1903 2027 9733101052

N.A. NAWABUDDIN earlier HINDUSTAN THOMPSON ASSOC

1 1904 2027 9810831544

N.A. RAMESH MALIK 2 1603 2027 9311530563

N.A. SURYADEEP KR VARMA earlier PREET KAUR

3 004 1800 9871371275

N.A. GR GUPTA 4 003 1800 9254344767

6034961 SAKSHI GURNANI 6 1601 3410

Related to Unitech

promoter Praveen Gurnani

N.A. SANJEEV BHASIN 7 003 1800 9999052888

N.A. SANJAY MITTAL 7 004 1800 9810159141

N.A. PUNEET CHOPRA 8 003 1800 9871339989

7. That whereas excess FAR is compoundable to an extent as

per Rule, there can be no builtup area by way of extra floor

beyond the sanctioned plan is very well settled in Priyanka

Estates International v State of Assam 2010 (2) SCC 27 AIR

2010 SC 1030:

"69. However, the said contention cannot be accepted

as construction of an extra floor does not fall within the

12

category of compoundable items which is manifest from

Appendix III of the building bye-laws of the

Corporation reproduced hereinabove.

xxxx

79. The instant case is not a case of breach of contract.

It is a clear case of breach of the obligation undertaken

to erect the building in accordance with building

regulations and failure to truthfully inform the warranty

of title and other allied circumstances.

xxx

82. In the light of the foregoing discussions, these

appeals are dismissed with the directions contained

hereinabove. Respondent-authorities shall be at liberty

to proceed with demolition of half of the 5th floor, if not

ultimately compounded; 6th, 7th and 8th floors as

mentioned hereinabove."

8. That the competent authority may see also Esha Ekta v

Municipal Corporation of Mumbai (2012) 4 SCC 689 & Esha

Ekta v Municipal Corporation of Mumbai (2013) 5 SCC 357

for re-iteration of this facet of demolition of even one floor

beyond original sanctioned plan. Since sanctioned plan of The

Uniworld Garden shows 496 flats and 10 extra flats are built

by raising one and half extra floors in Tower 1 (6 flats) and

one extra floor in Tower 2 (4 flats) - whereas the latest

sanctioned plan submitted in court by DGTCP Haryana/ STP

13

Gurgaon (vide Affidavit dated 27.09.13 & Affidavit dated

07.12.13) show only 496 flats. Actually 506 flats have been

constructed on ground by raising two and half extra floors

beyond sanctioned plan - even one extra floor was repeatedly

held to be non compoundable by SC. The DGTCP Haryana

Affidavits are silent on this point of 506 flats actually

constructed on extra floors added without any sanctioned plan.

89 EWS service personnel flats were thereby built as against

88 EWS service personnel flats existing in the sanctioned

plan.

9. That there are also grave violations of Disaster Management

Act, 2005 for which stringent provisions to deal with negligent

officers and ministers are provided in the law since 2007.

10. Kindly grant me early hearing on any of the dates 22, 23,

27, 28, 29, 30 January, 2014. In the interests of equity and

justice, till such time the appellant/complainant is heard

Senior Town Planner, Gurgaon may kindly be directed to

place on hold any action on DTCP Memo No. RL-

20/DS(R)/2013/ 60197 dt 11.12.13 directing Senior Town

Planner, Gurgaon to “report regarding violation done by

applicant vis-à-vis approved building plans.”

Place: Gurgaon

Date: 09.01.2014

Lt Col(Retd) Sarvadaman Singh Oberoi

Mobile:98187698349

Copy to:

Senior Town Planner, Gurgaon

Sector 14, Gurgaon 122001 – w.r.t. para 1, 2 & 10

14

Published in Haryana Govt. Gaz. Dated 19th April, 2002

25

Published in Haryana Govt. Gaz. Dated 19th April, 2002

77

From The Chief Administrator HUDA (Town Planning Wing), Panchkula. To 1.The Director, Town & Country Planning, Haryana, Chandigarh. 2.The Administrators, HUDA, Panchkula, Gurgaon, Hisar, Faridabad, Rohtak. 3.The Senior Town Planners, Gurgaon, Panchkula, Hisar. 4.All the Estate Officers, HUDA. 5.All the District Town Planners. Memo no. CTP (H) / DTP (N) – 17370-414 Dated: 28-09-2006 Subject: Composition Rates for compoundable violations in Plotted residential development applicable to Town & Country Planning Department and HUDA. The following composition rates for compoundable violations in plotted residential development applicable to Town & Country Planning Department and HUDA have been approved by the Govt. These rates shall come into force with immediate effect.

Ser Description of violation

Composition rates

1. BUILDING WITHOUT PLAN:

a. Construction raised without getting plan sanctioned and the construction so made

conform to the building bye laws /

zoning Compounding @ Rs. 400/- per sq. mts.

zoning.

b. Construction without building plans revalidated.

Compoundable @ Rs. 100/- per sq. mts. on constructed area.

2. COVERED AREA:

a. Covered area beyond zoning line but

within permissible limits.

Compoundable up to maximum limit of 10% of the set back to be compounded @

Rs. 10800/- per sq. mts.

b. Excess covered area beyond permissible

limit within zoned area.

Compoundable up to 10% of the total

permissible FAR. Up to 5% @ Rs. 3300/- per sq. mts. and beyond 5% @ 6500/- per

sq. mts .

c. Excess covered area beyond zoning line.

Compoundable up to maximum limit of 10% of the set back to be compounded @

Rs. 10800/- per sq. mts. (This will be over and above the composition fee of

excess covered area).

3. HEIGHT OF THE BUILDING: Increase in height up to (including

parapet and mumty) beyond permissible limit where no frame control is applicable.

Compoundable

a. (i) Up to 50 cm

(ii) Above 50cm to 1.00 meter.

Nil Rs.2000/- per sq. mts. Of covered area subject to the maximum of 12 sq. mts.

78

4. LIGHT AND VENTILATION:

a. Non provision of exhaust fan / flue in

the Kitchen. Compoundable @ Rs. 200/- each.

b. General light and ventilation including

toilets.

Variation up to 10% is compoundable @

Rs.1100/- per sq. mts. 5.

HEIGHT AND SIZE OF HABITABLE AND OTHER ROOMS.

a. Variation in Height and size of habitable

rooms, kitchen and toilets.

Reduction in height up to 10cm and reduction in area up to 5% of the

minimum required is compoundable @

Rs. 500/- each.

6. HEIGHT OF BOUNDARY WALL AND

TYPE OF GATE.

a. Change of design, height, size and

location of the gate / wicket gate and boundary wall.

Compoundable @ Rs. 1000/- each per

Violation up to the maximum of 10% in size and height of gate / wicket gate and

boundary wall.

7. DAMP PROOF COURSE (DPC)

a. Construction without obtaining DPC certificate bur according to approved

building plan.

Compoundable @ Rs.5/- per sq. mts of the permissible ground coverage.

b. Changing DPC after obtaining DPC

certificate but confirming to building

bye-laws / zoning.

Compoundable @ Rs.10/- per sq. mts. of the permissible ground coverage.

8. STAIR CASE:

a. Steps outside the zoned area on ground floor.

Steps shall not be counted towards covered area and compoundable @

Rs.1000/- per step subject to the maximum of five steps and maximum

width of 1.20 mts. Having maximum tread of 30cm each.

b. Tread and riser not as per rules.

Variation up to 10% compoundable @ Rs. 100/- per step.

c. Provision of winder steps at landings Compoundable @ Rs. 200/- each.

only.

d. Width of stair case reduced from Reduction only up to 10cm is

minimum width prescribed under the compoundable @ Rs. 500/- per stair rules. case.

e.

Head room height reduction from the Up to 10cm is compoundable @ Rs.

minimum prescribed under the rules. 500/- each Head room.

79

9.

CANTILEVER PROJECTION:

a.

Sanctionable projection but not shown in Compoundable @ Rs. 100/- per sq. mts.

the sanctioned building plan.

b.

Non-Sanctionable cantilever projection Compoundable @ Rs. 500/- per sq. mts.

but within zoning line.

c. Non-Sanctionable cantilever projection outside zoning line.

Violation up to maximum limit of 10% of the set back line is compoundable @ Rs.11000/- per sq mt .

d. Cantilever Cup Board / bay window

To be counted in covered area violation.

e.

Projection on Govt. Land

Compoundable to the limit of 30 cm in width @ Rs. 1000/- per sq. mts. at

door/window level only.

10. VENTILATION SHAFT:

a.

Area of shaft is less than the permissible.

Variation up to 10% is compounded @

Rs. 9000/- per sq. mts.

b.

Shaft covered at 2.40 meters height.

Compoundable @ Rs. 1000/- each light and ventilation parameters met with.

????

11. MISCELLANEOUS:

a.

Un-authorized occupation

Compoundable @ Rs. 50/- per sq. mts. Of

b.

Pipe shaft beyond zoning line.

To be counted in covered area violation.

c.

Non load bearing architectural pillars.

Compoundable @ Rs. 1000/- each provided is less than 30cm in dia not

touching roof or projection and

maximum up to 4 pillars.

d.

Major changes like shifting of internal wall, door, window, ventilator, left over

door and other changes in elevations.

Compoundable @ Rs. 100/- each.

e.

Store converted into Kitchen, provided it

meets with the provisions of rules. Compoundable @ Rs. 1500/-

NOTE: All the violations no covered by the composition rates listed above are

non- compoundable except minor variation in Public Health Services such as

construction of under ground water tank etc. which are to be ignored. -sd-

District Town Planner, For Chief Administrator, HUDA, Panchkula.

130

129A

131

130

132

131

133

132

letter to dgtcp haryana and stp gurgaon 09.01.2014 with annxs p

Real Estate