How much does CMDA authorities earn for one building approval?
| I just happened to read this news item from TOI and was surprised by what was published by them. We all know that building approval in chennai in the recent times have being taking longer than any other metro in India. |
I always wonder if the authorities are not inteligent enough to handle massive projects approval at faster pace. May i thought they dont have the neccessary infrastructure to do so.Well after reading this we know it is more than that. Even if we give them the best of workplace, approvals would take time. It all depends on Builders.
Any guess why DLF increased carpet areas all of sudden and if it can be related to sorting out approval issues with respect to Electricity post etc in their site. DLF safely passed their overheads to both innocent and greedy buyers who did not care about extra common area and were just thinking about how much DLF would appreciate after 2 years. I feel only sorry for genuine buyers who really wanted to own DLF. Same carpet area, more common area. Hmmmmm.
Purva ,Hirco and the host of other projects are still facing approval delays. If the payment is Rs 50-75 PSF then imagine who is the richest govt employees in Chennai 
.May GOD HELP GENUINE BUYERS and impart some sanity on CMDA.
Builders up in arms against CMDA, want it revamped
A group of builders has come out in the open against the Chennai Metropolitan Development Authority (CMDA) and the Directorate of Town and Country Planning (DTCP), calling the two agencies retarding forces.
On Monday, the members of the Federation of Tamil Nadu Flat and Housing Promoters’ Association staged a mock funeral in front of the CMDA office, carrying a dummy of the city’s second master plan on a bier.
Later, association president P Manishankar told TOI: “The CMDA and the DTCP need to be revamped and divested of the powers of giving building plan approvals. Instead, their role should be that of formulating long-term developmental plans, setting up satellite cities, doing zonal classification of land and imposing strict regulatory mechanisms. These agencies, working with skeletal staff, take more than a year and at times even two years to issue clearance for buildings at present.”
By delegating powers to give plan approvals to corporations, municipalities, town panchayats and village panchayats, such inordinate delays could be avoided, he noted.
Manishankar said: “In Chennai, the corporation takes only 15 days to one month to clear applications seeking building (ground plus one floor) permission. Same is the case with other corporations too. However, when it comes to constructing a building with stilt plus two floors or a special building having ground plus three floors, the builder is at the mercy of the CMDA (in Chennai) or the DTCP (outside Chennai).”
The primary reason for the delay in these agencies was that there was no accountability for the officials working there, he lamented. “If the applications do not comply with the norms, they should be rejected in the initial scrutiny itself. Instead, the officials sit on files for months together to assess whether the builder will pay them their due. Brokers hang around in these agencies to strike deals with the builders. While the officials take a cut of Rs 20 per sq ft in the DTCP, in the CMDA it is as high as Rs 50 to Rs 75 per sq ft. Those who refuse to pay will never get their approvals. While rejecting the files, the officials merely say they are not as per norms. They never specify the defects,” noted Manishankar.
To make the officials more accountable, he said, they should be shuffled once in five years.
By introducing inter-departmental transfers among the CMDA, DTCP and the public works department, it could be ensured that no official stayed in a single place for long periods.
The federation has also called for an adalat for handling plan applications pending for more than six months.
CMDA is a big joke, and nobody is bothered, the law is an (proverbial) ass, nobody cares a damn. It is a sorry state of affairs. there is absolutely no accountability. All the officers are multimillionaires, even the drivers are reputed to be crorepathis. the place whiffs of corruption, and the mafia of the politicians, officials, the textile lobby, the builders clan et al, make a handsome pot-le-pourri. Who is the ultimate loser ?
wondering if anyone had a look at the new masterplan 2008 released just some time ago.
some peculiarities.. how will the textile lobby be saved by way of repeals ?
http://www.cmdachennai.gov.in/Volume2_English_PDF/Volume2_Development%20Regulations_English_Sep2008.pdf
very interesting how a govt. would work to stoop to all levels,
the very interesting aspect of the ordinance being extended for the second year in succession, banning demolitions of all kinds !!
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/Cities/Chennai/Activists_in_20-yr_tug-of-war_with_govt_/articleshow/3434753.cms
Activists in 20-yr tug-of-war with govt
2 Sep 2008, 0618 hrs IST, A Subramani,TNN
CHENNAI: As of today, no unauthorised building in the city can be demolished, and no pending show-cause or stop-work notices to these structures can be enforced by any civic authority.
Reason: The Tamil Nadu Laws (Special Provisions) Ordinance, re-promulgated on July 25, 2008, expressly prohibits any action against any violator by any authority in the state. Section 3 of the ordinance, which extends by another year a similar ordinance issued last year, provides for maintenance of status quo of all buildings “not withstanding any judgment, or decree by any court.”
As if this is not enough, Section 3(3) further states that all notices issued by any authority for initiating action against unauthorised development shall be deemed to have been suspended, and no punitive action be taken for one year.”
Thus, it took just an ordinance for the state to set at naught the over two-decadelong fight against illegal constructions in the city and a litany of hard-won court rulings to raze such structures.
Even last week, the Citizen Consumer and Civic Action Group (CAG), moved a public interest writ petition questioning the validity of the ordinance. The First Bench of the Madras High Court, however, declined to entertain the plea or express any opinion on the matter.
It all began exactly 20 years ago, when the CAG moved the court after the government issued exemptions to 73 buildings that had violated the rules. When the matter was still pending in the Supreme Court, the state government amended Section 113 of the Tamil Nadu Town and Country Planning Act 1971, empowering itself to regularise unauthorised constructions after collecting proportionate “regularisation fee.”
On August 18, 2000, the Supreme Court upheld Section 113-A of the Act, but made it clear that it should be a “one-time measure” . As per the order, buildings constructed before February 28, 1999 alone were eligible for regularisation.
However, the government issued the Tamil Nadu Ordinance No. 7 in 2000, extending the cut-off date to buildings completed on or before August 31, 2000.
Making a mockery of the legal sanction for a one-time measure, the state government came out with similar amendments in 2001 and 2002. The CAG challenged all the above schemes that were announced.
In a landmark ruling on August 23, 2006, a division bench comprising the then Chief Justice A P Shah and Justice K Chandru struck down all the three regularisation schemes and censured the government and civic authorities for their inefficiency and collusion. It also came out with exhaustive guidelines and constituted a monitoring committee.
The government took the matter to the Supreme Court and obtained an order of status quo. Putting the interim breather to the advantage of violators, it issued the ordinance envisaging moratorium on all demolitions for a year. After the first ordinance lapsed in July 2007, it promptly re-promulgated the ordinance this year.
It is a virtual tug of war between civic activists and a combined force of government and violators. In the process, ordinances are promulgated to circumvent court orders that are unfavourable to violators comprising big builders and multi-storeyed commercial complexes.
Upholding violations
First PIL in 1988, after government exempts 73 violators In August 2000, SC permits regularisation of unauthorised buildings, as a one-time measure. In July 2007, the ordinance was promulgated to withhold demolition of unauthorised buildings or take action against violators for one year In July 2008, the government re-promulgates the ordinance and extends it to another year.
NOW COMPARE THIS WITH WHAT HAPPENNED BEFORE THE SUPREME COURT !!
Status quo on demolitions in Chennai
J. Venkatesan
It will be maintained till December 14, next date of hearing in Supreme Court
HC had quashed law granting moratorium on demolitions
State Government, CMDA filed SLPs
New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Tuesday ordered maintenance of status quo on demolition of unauthorised constructions in Chennai.
Demolitions were taken up after the Madras High Court struck down as unconstitutional a law granting one-year moratorium on demolition of all types of unauthorised constructions, numbering over 37,000, including 147 high-rise commercial complexes.
A three-Judge Bench comprising Chief Justice K.G. Balakrishnan, Justice R.V. Raveendran and Justice J.M. Panchal granted status quo on two special leave petitions filed by the Tamil Nadu Government and the Chennai Metropolitan Development Authority (CMDA) challenging the November 13 High Court judgment.
Additional Solicitor General Gopal Subramaniam, appearing for the Tamil Nadu Government, made a mention before the Bench about the SLPs and sought a stay on demolitions.
He said that the law granting one-year moratorium on demolitions was only an interim measure. The Government had constituted the Justice Mohan Committee to consider all aspects of development and the entire Master Plan would be examined, he said. The Chief Justice told the ASG, “This is directly recognising all illegal constructions.”
Justice Raveendran told the ASG “what we [Supreme Court] have said [in an earlier judgment] was such a moratorium could be a one-time measure, which has now become a regular feature.”
The Bench, however, ordered status quo on all demolitions till December 14, the next date of hearing.
The SLPs said that there had been a rapid increase in the population of all metro cities, including Chennai, owing to industrialisation and migration, putting pressure on land and infrastructure. An ordinance was promulgated (it later became an Act) on July 27 in respect of specified categories of unauthorised development, suspending punitive action for one year.
The SLPs said that the High Court had proceeded on the sole basis that the only purpose of the Act was to declare the decision rendered by the High Court as being null and void and of no effect.
In doing so it failed to take into account the purpose and policy underlying the ordinance.
“Unauthorised constructions have become a reality because the planning process itself had broken down. The law recognises the need to take urgent measures to revitalise the planning process. These issues cannot be dealt with by freezing development and ordering demolition on a large scale.”
http://www.hindu.com/2007/12/05/stories/2007120559010100.htm
so how does the Govt. work and for whom ??
are you still not convinced ??
It is mentioned by persons connected with property development some illegally constructed buildings are owned by people in the highest position of power or their nominees. In wishing it’s not true, am I just naive? Perhaps! Our politicians of any and every colour believe and behave they’re above law! They all have a vested interest in maintaining and perpetuating the status quo and will treat all judicial pronouncements as the rantings of the stupid and negate them by their smart legislative powers!
God save India!
Can the Corporation of Chennai approve plan for g+2 with a total of 5 kitchens?
This is for self occupying flats we plan to construct within our bro & sis. Thanks in advance.
i have bought a land for my industry which is regularised under regularisation scheme. As per the G.O. and the court order for regularisation scheme(1999) it has a documentaion proof for subdividing in the year 1995 and submittion for approval by 2000 and got the planning permit by 2001. Now i applied for building construction approval which is denied by the CMDA planning officer. and not even willing to know when it is registered and to know about the eligibility. iam half the way struck with my project.