Mumbai: In a huge setback to Adarsh society, the Maharashtra government has told the judicial commission that the controversial society did not have coastal regulation zone (CRZ) clearance or a nod from the Union ministry of environment & forests (MoEF).
The state also said the society could not have risen to 31 floors, as developmental control regulations (DCR), 1967, were applicable to it. This meant it could have risen to 46.5 metres, as opposed to it towering today at around 102 metres.
The state’s stand, for the first time, puts the society in the dock, even as the judicial commission wrapped up hearings in the case on Tuesday. The commission headed by Justice (retired) J A Patil and member P Subrahmanyam has indicated that it will submit its report to the state government by mid-March.
Senior advocate A Y Sakhare and advocates U Nighot and B Vasudev have supported the MoEF’s claim that its 2003 letter was misrepresented as environmental clearance. The Adarsh members insisted they had the CRZ nod from the state urban development department and that even if there was no clearance they could seek permission later. The MoEF had recommended demolishing the building, which is in a CRZ area, for lack of permission.
The state insisted that DCR (1967) was applicable to the building; instead the Mumbai Metropolitan Region Development Authority (MMRDA) had applied DCR (1991), which did not have height restrictions. DCR (1967) had more stringent rules concerning height of a building, parking space, exemption of areas used for common amenities like staircase, lift and the construction of a podium. The state further admitted that a ‘‘bona fide error’’ had been committed by former principal secretary Ramanand Tiwari on procedures followed for dereserving land meant for the Brihanmumbai Electric Supply & Transport undertaking to favour the society.
The government, however, insisted members were approved for Adarsh on the basis of documents they submitted and no fault could be found with the collector if some had not submitted all the papers.
The state avoided a direct answer on whether any of its officers gave permission to Adarsh as quid pro quo for favours from the society.
Once the commission submits its report, the state will have to decide whether to accept it or not.
THE GREAT HOUSING SAGA
The Adarsh commission was set up on January 8, 2011. It is headed by Justice (retired) J A Patil, a former judge of the Bombay High Court, and member P Subrahmanyam, former state chief secretary
It was given 13 terms of reference, including who owned the land and whether it was reserved for housing Kargil war widows, and whether reduction of width of Captain Prakash Pethe road was in accordance with law
In its 2012 interim report, the commission held that the land belonged to the state government and negated the army’s claims over the plot
IMPORTANT WITNESSES
Union home minister Sushilkumar Shinde
Former chief ministers, the late Vilasrao Deshmukh, and Ashok Chavan
Former army chiefs Deepak Kapoor and N C Vij
WHAT NEXT
The commission is scheduled to submit its report to the state by mid-March. The state can accept or reject its findings. The state can also submit an action taken report before the legislative assembly
214 | Number of witnesses
2,500 | Number of pages of statements of witnesses
Courtesy:
Shibu Thomas TNN
http://epaper.timesofindia.com/Default/Scripting/ArticleWin.asp?From=Archive&Source=Page&Skin=TOINEW&BaseHref=TOIM/2013/01/16&PageLabel=4&EntityId=Ar00400&ViewMode=HTML
The state also said the society could not have risen to 31 floors, as developmental control regulations (DCR), 1967, were applicable to it. This meant it could have risen to 46.5 metres, as opposed to it towering today at around 102 metres.
The state’s stand, for the first time, puts the society in the dock, even as the judicial commission wrapped up hearings in the case on Tuesday. The commission headed by Justice (retired) J A Patil and member P Subrahmanyam has indicated that it will submit its report to the state government by mid-March.
Senior advocate A Y Sakhare and advocates U Nighot and B Vasudev have supported the MoEF’s claim that its 2003 letter was misrepresented as environmental clearance. The Adarsh members insisted they had the CRZ nod from the state urban development department and that even if there was no clearance they could seek permission later. The MoEF had recommended demolishing the building, which is in a CRZ area, for lack of permission.
The state insisted that DCR (1967) was applicable to the building; instead the Mumbai Metropolitan Region Development Authority (MMRDA) had applied DCR (1991), which did not have height restrictions. DCR (1967) had more stringent rules concerning height of a building, parking space, exemption of areas used for common amenities like staircase, lift and the construction of a podium. The state further admitted that a ‘‘bona fide error’’ had been committed by former principal secretary Ramanand Tiwari on procedures followed for dereserving land meant for the Brihanmumbai Electric Supply & Transport undertaking to favour the society.
The government, however, insisted members were approved for Adarsh on the basis of documents they submitted and no fault could be found with the collector if some had not submitted all the papers.
The state avoided a direct answer on whether any of its officers gave permission to Adarsh as quid pro quo for favours from the society.
Once the commission submits its report, the state will have to decide whether to accept it or not.
THE GREAT HOUSING SAGA
The Adarsh commission was set up on January 8, 2011. It is headed by Justice (retired) J A Patil, a former judge of the Bombay High Court, and member P Subrahmanyam, former state chief secretary
It was given 13 terms of reference, including who owned the land and whether it was reserved for housing Kargil war widows, and whether reduction of width of Captain Prakash Pethe road was in accordance with law
In its 2012 interim report, the commission held that the land belonged to the state government and negated the army’s claims over the plot
IMPORTANT WITNESSES
Union home minister Sushilkumar Shinde
Former chief ministers, the late Vilasrao Deshmukh, and Ashok Chavan
Former army chiefs Deepak Kapoor and N C Vij
WHAT NEXT
The commission is scheduled to submit its report to the state by mid-March. The state can accept or reject its findings. The state can also submit an action taken report before the legislative assembly
214 | Number of witnesses
2,500 | Number of pages of statements of witnesses
Shibu Thomas TNN
http://epaper.timesofindia.com/Default/Scripting/ArticleWin.asp?From=Archive&Source=Page&Skin=TOINEW&BaseHref=TOIM/2013/01/16&PageLabel=4&EntityId=Ar00400&ViewMode=HTML
No comments:
Post a Comment