New Metro lines connecting more NCR areas

New Metro lines connecting more NCR areas

Nov 8, 2011,
NEW DELHI: The NCR concept just got a shot in the arm. In a bid to connect the various parts of Delhi with the neighboring areas of Bahadurgarh, Noida, Gurgaon as well as Faridabad, the Delhi Metro will be going further inside these NCR areas in the third phase of its network. While the detailed project reports (DPR) for the extensions to Gurgaon, Faridabad and Bahadurgarh is ready and have been sent to the ministry of urban development for approval, the alignment for extension to Noida's sector 62 is still under finalization. Work on all the connecting extensions to the NCR areas is expected to be undertaken by 2012, to be part of the Delhi Metro's phase III construction.

With these alignments, the Delhi Metro will be blurring the state lines further and underlining the NCR concept, say officials. Said a spokesperson from the Delhi Metro Rail Corporation, "The empowered group of ministers (EGoM) has directed that the lines (connecting the NCR) may be considered for inclusion in Delhi Metro Phase III and a separate proposal be brought for consideration of the EGoM. We are in the process of finalizing all the alignments at present." The alignments include the extension of the existing Mundka corridor (Mundka-Inderlok) to Bahadurgarh, crossing the Tikri Border via Ghevra. The other line extension is that of the Yamuna Bank corridor to Noida's sector 62 via sector 32. This corridor at present is till Noida City Center. Another line extension - of the new Mukundpur-Yamuna Vihar corridor of Phase III on to Shiv Vihar, an expansion by 3km, will also bring the outskirts of Delhi into closer contact with the central parts.

That's not all. As reported by TOI earlier, the extension of the Dwarka sector 21-Noida City Center line to IFFCO Chowk via Palam Vihar along with the extension of the Badarpur corridor to YMCA Chowk in Faridabad is also on the cards. This is besides the new corridor from Dwarka to Najafgarh, stretching over 13.875km, which has been sent to the ministry of urban development already for approval. Sources in Delhi Metro said that these alignments had been also clubbed with the three new extensions - Bahadurgarh, Noida sector 62 and Shiv Vihar, as a separate proposal for EGoM approval. "The proposal is for inclusion in the Delhi Metro Phase III, which means that work will need to be started by 2012. The DPRs of all these alignments have been put on fast-track," said the Delhi Metro official.

The alignments are in varying stages of planning and finalization, say officials. While the DPR for the Mundka-Bahadurgarh corridor was submitted to the MoUD and the Haryana government in the last week of October, the DPR for the Dwarka-Najafgarh and the Dwarka-IFFCO Chowk (Gurgaon) corridors are ready and have been sent for approval to the government for approval. The Faridabad extension has already gotten the green signal from the EGoM. However, the surveys for alignment finalization for both the Yamuna Vihar-Shiv Vihar as well as the Noida sector 62 lines are still underway. While the report on the former alignment is expected to be submitted by November 15, the DPR for the latter is still to be finished.

SUPREME COURT ORDER THAT GPA CANNOT BE TREATED AS A REGISTERED SALE DEED

No property sale on power of attorney: Supreme Court

New Delhi, October 13, 2011
The verdict won't affect validity of sale deals and powers of attorney in genuine transaction.
Property sales through the common practice of general power of attorney (GPA) will not give ownership title to the buyer.
In a landmark judgment that is expected to send a large number of property owners into a tizzy, the Supreme Court held that the GPA method of immovable property sales is not a valid form of transfer of property.
A three-judge bench presided over by Justice R. V. Raveendran said that property can be lawfully transferred only through registered sale deeds.
"A power of attorney is not an instrument of transfer in regard to any right, title or interest in an immovable property," the bench said, after interpreting various provisions of the law concerning property sales. However, the bench said the judgment will not affect "genuine transactions" under the GPA.
The judgment delivered on Wednesday would have an impact on both freehold and leasehold properties and affect the mode of transfer of property in Delhi and the National Capital Region (NCR) where GPA sales are very common. Even though it can cause some hardship to those who have already purchased property through the GPA, the order will help curb evasion of duties, flow of black money into real estate and also save people from being cheated by unscrupulous owners selling the same property to several people.
Navin Raheja, chairman and managing director of Raheja Developers said, "The court's decision will help to curb the circulation of black money to some extent in the real estate sector where titles are manipulated. Besides, many property transactions where prices are rounded off will be affected. However, overall there won't be any significant impact on normal property sales."
The apex court said there can be no mutation of property in municipal and revenue records on the basis of such documents. The bench, however, clarified that its order should not be a ground for disturbing mutations already effected by the Delhi Development Authority (DDA) or any other authority.
But, there is little relief for thousands of people who hold property without mutation as GPA sales can only be treated as existing sale agreements. An application of the order with prospective effect would have protected their interest. The court, though, stressed that it had merely reiterated the well- settled legal position that such transactions cannot be treated as completed transfers.
The court could not make the order applicable with prospective effect as it had not laid down any new law. However, it said that those who had already bought property through GPA before its judgment could use the documents to apply for regularisation of allotments and leases by development authorities.
"Nothing prevents affected parties from getting registered deeds of conveyance to complete their title. The said transactions may also be used to obtain specific performance or to defend possession under section 53A of TP (Transfer of Property) Act," the court said.
In order to ensure that GPA continues to serve its purpose, the court said its judgment will not affect the validity of sale agreements and powers of attorney executed in genuine transactions. "For example, a person may give a power of attorney to his spouse, son, daughter, brother, sister or a relative to manage his affairs or to execute a deed of conveyance."
The court further said that a person can enter into a development agreement with a land developer or builder for developing the land either by forming plots or by constructing apartment buildings. In that connection he can execute an agreement of sale and grant a power of attorney that will allow the developer to further sell the property to prospective purchasers.
While hearing a matter on the subject, the court had decided to clarify the law on the issue as such transfers had not only led to evasion of stamp duty and registration charges but had also provided scope for investing black money in real estate. Besides, such transfers were giving nightmares to bona fide purchasers as the same property could be sold to several people in the absence of verification or certification of title. A proper verification of ownership was possible only if all property were transferred through registered sale deeds.
Noting that such transactions were now not just limited to Delhi but had spread to neighbouring areas, the court had sought the views of the Centre and the states of Delhi, Haryana, Punjab and Uttar Pradesh. There was a near unanimity that such transactions should be discouraged as it caused loss of revenue and increased litigation due to defective titles.
Going into the legality of such transfers, the court said any contract of sale which was not a registered sale deed would fall short of the requirements of the relevant provisions of the Transfer of Property Act and could not confer any title.
The court said a transfer of property by way of sale could only be by a sale deed. "In the absence of a deed of conveyance (duly stamped and registered as required by law), no right, title or interest in an immovable property can be transferred," the bench said.

NCR Constituent Areas

NCR Constituent Areas

National Capital Region (NCR) is one of the first experimented Regions of the country. It is a unique example for inter-state regional development planning for a region with Nation Capital as its core. The National Capital Region as notified covers an area of about 33,578 sq kms falling in the territorial jurisdictions of four State Governments namely, National Capital Territory of Delhi, Haryana, UP, and Rajasthan. It is one of the largest National Capital Region of the World and constitutes about 1.60% of the country’s land area, about 86% of the total area of Kerala State and its area is more than the combined area of three States of Tripura, Nagaland and Sikkim.
NCR is characterized by the presence of highly ecologically sensitive areas like extension of Aravalli ridge, Forests, Wild life and Bird sanctuaries, rivers Ganga, Yamuna and Hindon, fertile cultivated and is a dynamic rural-urban region being the home of 371 lakhs people living in 108 towns of which 17 are class I cities and more than 7500 rural settlements.
The four constituent Sub-Regions of NCR are given below:
1) The Haryana Sub-Region comprises of nine districts, that is, Faridabad, Gurgaon, Mewat, Rohtak, Sonepat, Rewari, Jhajjhar (Bhadurgarh), Panipat and Palwal together constituting about 40% (13,413 sq. kms.) of the Region;
2) The Uttar Pradesh Sub-Region comprises of five districts, that is, Meerut, Ghaziabad, Gautam Budha Nagar, Bulandshahr, and Baghpat together constituting about 32% ( 10,853 sq. kms.) of the Region;
3) The Rajasthan Sub-Region comprises of Alwar district constituting about 23% (7,829 sq. kms.) of the Region ; &
4) The NCT of Delhi constituting about 5% (1,483 sq. kms.) of the Region.

Competition Commission imposes heavy penalties for abuse of dominance

Competition - India
Competition Commission imposes heavy penalties for abuse of dominance

September 22 2011
Background
In its August 12 2011 decision in Belaire Owners' Association v DLF Limited (19/2010) the Competition Commission of India imposed a penalty on DLF Ltd, India's largest real estate developer. The penalty comprised 7% of DLF's average turnover for the last three years, amounting to Rs6.3 billion, and was imposed for abuse of DLF's dominant position following the inclusion of unfair conditions in agreements it concluded with a number of flat buyers. The commission also directed DLF to cease and desist from formulating and imposing such unfair conditions in its agreements with buyers in Gurgaon, and to modify unfair conditions imposed on its buyers within three months of the date of receipt of this order.
Facts
In its initial order (passed under Section 26(1) of the Competition Act 2002), the commission had formed an opinion that a prima facie case existed and directed the director general to investigate the matter. This view was challenged by DLF before the Competition Appellate Tribunal, raising issues of jurisdiction, among other things. On August 18 2010 the tribunal refused to intervene at this stage and observed that DLF could raise these issues before the commission (for further details please see "Competition Appellate Tribunal allows Competition Commission to continue DLF probe").
In turn, Belaire Owners' Association argued that DLF had imposed "arbitrary, unfair and unreasonable conditions" on the buyers that had been allocated apartments for the Belaire housing complex (located in Gurgaon and under construction by DLF). It argued that such conditions amounted to abuse of DLF's dominant position in the relevant market - namely, high-end residential accommodation in Gurgaon. Some of the unfair conditions impugned by the informant were as follows:
The number of floors (which initially stood at 19 and on which basis the apartment allottees had booked their respective apartments) has been increased to 29, thus resulting in the areas and facilities originally earmarked for the apartment allottees being substantially compressed and leading to delay in completion of the project.
The apartment buyers' agreement was signed several months after the booking of the apartment, by which time the allottees had already paid a substantial amount and had little option but to adhere to the dictates of DLF.
The agreement stipulated that DLF had the absolute right to reject and refuse to execute any apartment buyers' agreement without assigning any reason, cause or explanation to the allottees.
The agreement was executed with the apartment buyers and construction started without an approved building plan. No consent of the apartment allottees was required for any change or condition imposed at the time of approval of the layout plan.
The agreement did not contain the proportionate liability clause to tie commensurate penalties or damages to DLF for breach of its obligations.
After conducting an in-depth investigation into the allegations, the director general held that DLF, in exercise of its market power and dominance, had imposed unfair conditions of sale on consumers in violation of Section 4(2)(a)(i) of the act (for further details please see "Important cases before the Competition Commission").
Decision
After considering the director general's report and the submissions made by the respondents, the commission made the following rulings.
The commission held that the Competition Act applied to all existing agreements, including any that were entered into before Section 4 of the act came into force, as documents filed by the informant showed that in some cases the agreements were entered into between DLF and the allottees after the date of commencement of Section 4 of the act.
The commission considered the definition of 'relevant market' in the context of Section 4, read with Section 2(r), Section 19(5), Section 19(6) and Section 19(7) of the act. It held that, in a vast majority of cases, a small (ie, 5%) increase in the price of an apartment in Gurgaon would not make a person shift his or her preference to Ghaziabad, Bahadurgarh or Faridabad on the peripheries of Delhi, or even to Delhi. Therefore, the commission held that the 'relevant market' was the market for services of a developer or builder in respect of 'high-end' residential accommodation in Gurgaon.
The commission further considered whether DLF was dominant in this market, in the context of Section 4 read with Section 19 (4) of the act. Due to the sheer size and resources, market share and economic advantage that DLF enjoyed over its competitors, DLF was not sufficiently constrained by other players operating on the market and had a significant position of strength by virtue of which it could operate independently of competitive forces (restraints) and could also influence consumers in its favour in the relevant market.
After considering the various factors and replies from the parties concerned, the commission held that DLF Ltd had contravened Section 4(2)(a)(i) of the act by directly or indirectly imposing unfair or discriminatory condition in the sale of services, as it had:
commenced the project without approval;
increased the number of floors after commencement;
increased the floor area ratio and density per acre;
delayed completion;
possessed and forfeited payments; and
included clauses in the agreement that were heavily biased in favour of itself and against consumers.
As of August 30 2011 the commission had disposed of 10 further complaints pending against DLF. The commission found DLF guilty of abuse of its dominant position in its other Gurgaon projects and issued a cease and desist order against DLF.
Comment
The decision is the first time in India that competition law has covered the exploitative nature of abuse of a dominant position. Previously, jurisprudence on abuse of a dominant position centred mainly on exclusionary abuses (eg, predatory pricing or refusal to deal), which have the effect of excluding competitors. The decision also overlaps with the well-defined concepts of 'unfair trade practice', which have hitherto been reserved for consumer disputes, and has exposed the common industry practice of builders appropriating the funds raised from buyers for other projects.
Finally, the decision shows that the commission continues to rely on international case law when making its decisions, particularly that of the United States and the European Union. However, there remains some ambiguity in the methodology used by the commission for the computation of the penalty. Unlike in other jurisdictions, there are no well-defined guidelines for the imposition of such heavy monetary fines in India. Given the complex definition of what constitutes a 'dominant position' under Section 4 of the act, which is not only dependent on market share, builders in India must be careful when drafting flat buyer agreements.

GLOBAL NUCLEAR ENERGY CENTRE

Global nuclear Energy Centre

The country's first Global Centre for Nuclear Energy, an initiative announced by Prime Minister in April, will come up in Bahadurgarh town on the border of Haryana and Delhi.

The Centre will be set up on priority basis at 125 acres while 80 acres will be kept for residential plots. The project will take minimum three years to complete, said project director Dr J P Shrivastva, who led a six-member-team that visited Jassaurkheri and Kheri Jassuar villages Bahadurgarh (On KMP Express Way, 5.6 Kms from Asaudha More on NH 10) today. (July 02, 2010)

Four schools will be established here to carry out research in the field of nuclear security, radiological conservation and use of radioistopes techniques, he said, adding that the Centre would be set up on the pattern of Bhabha Atomic Research Centre, Mumbai. The state-of-the-art facility will conduct research and development of design systems that are intrinsically safe, secure, proliferation resistant and sustainable.

Decks cleared for IIT-D campus in Haryana

Decks cleared for IIT-D campus in Haryana

TNN Sep 15, 2011, 03.14AM IST
NEW DELHI: The proposal to set up a second campus of IIT-Delhi in Haryana was cleared by the IIT council on Wednesday. The proposed 'Extension Centre', spread across 100-acre, would have advanced research facilities. Haryana offered to provide land free of cost for this project. Sources said the centre could come up in Bahadurgarh or its adjoining areas so that it remains close to the capital.

Though there were reports of the state being keen to take the centre to Rohtak, it has not found favour since the city is far away from the national capital. "We are assessing where such a chunk can be easily acquired for the institute," said a senior official of the Haryana government.
Surendra Prasad, director, IIT-Delhi, said, "We were just waiting for the IIT council to approve the second campus before we could zero in on any location. Since the council has now given a go-ahead, we will start working on finalizing a good location."
Established in 1961, the IIT-Delhi campus in Hauz Khas has the smallest area - 320 acre - as compared to other IITs. A second campus was in the offing for the last many years and even Greater Noida was once being considered as an ideal place.Rohtak MP Deepender Singh Hooda, who attended the meeting, said setting up of IIT Extension Centre would set new benchmark in the development of educational infrastructure in the state. Haryana recently got institutions like Indian Institute of Management, a central university, a National Defence University and Central Institute of Plastics Engineering and Technology. The state has 21 universities and about 1,286 institutions of higher education

SAMPLE RTI APPLICATION FORM

SAMPLE RTI APPLICATION FORM
Date

To,
The Public information Officer
________________________
____________________________
____________________________
PIN: _______________________


Sir,

Subject: Request for Information under Right to Information Act 2005.

I Sri / Smt / Ms.
__________________________________________________________

Son/Daughter/wife of Shri/ Smt/ Ms.
__________________________________________

Resident of
______________________________________________________________,

Telephone number (with STD Code) ____- _____________________ and/or mobile
number: ______________________________ wish to seek information as under
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I hereby inform that following formalities have been completed by me:

1. That I have deposited the requisite fee of Rs. _____/- by way of Cash / banker
cheque / Draft / Postal Order/ others ___________________ ) favoring
__________________________________ dated ________________.

2. I need the photocopy of the documents and I had deposited the cost of the
photocopy of Rs. ____/- for _____ (Number of Pages)
or

3. I had deposited sum of Rs. _____/- for the charges of CD. (strike out which ever
is not applicable)

4. That I belong to Category of below Poverty Line (BPL): Yes / No
(Strike whichever is not applicable). If yes, I am attaching the valid photocopy of
the certificate. Yes / No

5. That I am ‘Citizen’ of India and I am asking the information as ‘Citizen’.

6. I assure that I shall not allow/ cause to use/ pass/share/display/ or circulate the
Information received in any case and under any circumstances, with any person or
in any manner which would be detrimental to the Unity and Sovereignty or
against the Interest of India.

Signature of the Applicant

Dated:

Form A

[See rule 3 (1)]
Date

To

The State Public Information Officer e.g. City Magistrate, D.C. Office, Rohtak, 124 001

1. Full name of the applicant: xxxxxxxxxx

2. Address: yyyyyyyy

3. Particulars of information required: - e.g. from Tehasildar Sale - Rohtak

(i) Subject matter of information e.g. “Displaced Persons (Compensation and Rehabilitation) Act, 1954 of Central Govt., Act No 44 of 1954”

(ii) The period to which the zz
information relates

(iii) Description of the XXXXXXXX

information required



(iv) Whether information is XXX
by post or in person

(v) In case by post Registered
(Ordinary, Registered or Speed)


Place: New Delhi (Signature of the Applicant)
Date:


Payment detail: e.g. Payment of Rs. 100/- (Rs. 50/- fee under RTI Act and Rs. 50/- for postal charges)

Encl: - e.g. Copy of Treasure Challan for Rs. 100/- No. Dated of SBI, Rohtak.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

Received your application dated _______________ ,
Vide Diary No.______________ dated _____________ .

(Signature)
e.g. City Magistrate, D.C. Office, Rohtak
State Public Information Officer/ Name of the Department/Office