Hello
I am starting this new tread since a number of projects in CR are approaching the final 6 months of completion. Mahagaun recently paid penalty cheques to all the owners in Mascot for any delay .

Dumping ground issue is out of Dundaheda now and this has come in several news papers now .
NH 24 widening is sanctioned and tender is floated.Does any one have any thing to add .

I am an owner in Mahagun mascot project and am an end user. Would like to see a useful flow in information in this thread for the benefit of all .

Happy threading :)
Read more
Reply
8447 Replies
Sort by :Filter by :
  • Originally Posted by sepulchar
    The points might come in favour of DG:
    1. The area was earmarked, notified, planned for Dumping Ground.
    2. The area has obtained approvals from State Goverment and Ghaziabad authority.
    3. The area is being developed by GNN for dumping ground
    4. The court case also talks about it:
    The Vice Chairman, GDA considered the representation. The Nagar Nigam submitted in its reply, to the representation that Khasra No. 937 area about 50 bighas in village Dundahera, Tehsil and District Ghaziabad is a 'Banjar land' and is proposed for construction of SWMP as dumping yard. In a Writ Petition No.888 of 1996 (Almitra H. Patel vs. State of UP & others) filed in public interest the Supreme Court had given directions for establishment of Solid Waste Management Sewerage and Drainage Improvement Centre in the areas of Hindan Air Force Station in Ghaziabad City. Under the directions of the Supreme Court, in all the cities of the country, where Air Force Stations are established, 100% financial grants will be provided by the Ministry of Urban Development and Poverty Eradication of the Central Government, for urban waste management and to establish the plants for management of urban waste. The Ghaziabad city was also included in the scheme. The Municipal Solid Waste (Management) Rules 2000 were notified on 24.9.2000 by the Central Forest and Environment Ministry. In pursuance to the directions of the Supreme Court and the notification notifying Municipal Waste (Management) Rules 2000, a plan was prepared by the experts of HUDCO to select a site for disposal of urban waste by scientific means. The preparation of compost plant and land filling is the main part of this scheme. A joint inspection was made by the Deputy Advisor of C.P.H.O. associated with the Ministry of Urban Development and Poverty Eradication of the Central Government along with the experts of HUDCO, representatives of the Hindan Air Force and the Regional Manager of the U.P. Pollution Control Board. They identified the land of about 14 acres in village Dundahera, for construction of SWMP and the land was made available by Nagar Nigam to the UP Jal Nigam on 20.10.2004. A boundary wall was constructed around the land in village Dundahera by the Jal Nigam surrounding Khasra Nos. 030, 941, 937/1, 937/2, 944, 946, 949, 951 and 953.
    8. The Nagar Nigam submitted to the Vice Chairman, GDA that any obstruction in the proposed SWMP constructed in pursuance to the directions issued by the Supreme Court, the Central Government and the Government of UP, will be against public interest. The SWMP is being constructed far away from the residential area. The petitioner has misled the High Court after selling the land to the private colonizers, who want to further sell the land on a very higher rate. The land around the proposed site is being used for agriculture and is recorded in the revenue records as agricultural land. The suggestion, that some land has been kept reserved for the said purpose at Dasna Jail is not correct. It is not within the areas of Nagar Nigam. The Nagar Nigam is authorised to carry out the schemes only within its notified areas.
    9. The Vice Chairman, GDA found that the Master Plan 2021 was prepared and was enforced from July, 2005. At the time of preparation of Master Plan, objections were invited from all concerned including the residents and the organisations in which the members of the Nagar Nigam also participated and that their objections were considered and decided. In the Master Plan the proposed land was shown to be as residential. At that time if Nagar Nigam has any objection or that if any project of Nagar Nigam was proposed on the site, it should have raised objection, which was not raised by it. The Master Plan has reserved areas for sewer treatment, water purification and solid waste management. The Nagar Nigam is not authorised to act contrary to the Master Plan. The Supreme Court did not give any such directions in Almitra H. Patel's case (supra) to establish SWMP in residential areas whereas in M.C. Mehta vs. Union of India & others the Supreme Court has given directions that the constructions should be made strictly in accordance with the Master Plan. The Nagar Nigam was a member of the Master Plan Committee. The Master Plan was prepared in cooperation with the Nagar Nigam and thus now the Nagar Nigam cannot make constructions contrary to the Master Plan. The land use of the concerned areas is residential. There are 10 areas earmarked in the Master Plan for waste management and that it is not appropriate even on the environmental concerns to have SWMP near residential colonies. The construction of SWMP in village Dundahera should be made only in accordance with the Master Plan.
    10. Shri Anil Kumar Tyagi filed a Second Writ Petition No. 57172 of 2006 in the High Court alleging that inspite of the orders of the Vice Chairman, GDA, the construction of boundary wall is being raised by the Nagar Nigam. The High Court, after perusing the order of the Vice Chairman, GDA and the objections raised by the Nagar Nigam stating that it has already spent about Rs. 70 lacs for construction of SWMP, expressed surprise of developing the land against the Master Plan.

    5. The colonizers / builders knowingly SOLD that land to flat owners.
    6. At the time there was no ABADI nearby only barren land, hence clear fault is of builders.
    7. Even if GNN would have constructed DG long way back , there would be possibility that population would have come nearby it, which is case near most of DGs, hence its not that important matter e.g. Delhi surroundings (both approved/unapproved colonies are next to it)
    8. Builders /GDA intentions to backstab Crossings and builders sold their inventory and next is lying in NE, hence they would not be much in favour, as when inventory was available in CR , they pushed/delayed DG ghost by power of money.

    Points in Favour of CR:
    1. The land pool is absorbed, hence less land available
    2. Strong CROMA

    See all you are saying is correct.but if some type of collusion of builders and gnn is proved dg won't come.they cannot punish people for a swmp.

    Helicopter deal is cancelled bcoz corruption is pointed out.crores are lost now.but the deal is gone.if gnn has taken money and delayed dg they have indulged in corruption and cheating the common public.this dg can become a symbol of corruption and cancelled
    CommentQuote
  • Originally Posted by dkppatiala
    See all you are saying is correct.but if some type of collusion of builders and gnn is proved dg won't come.they cannot punish people for a swmp.

    Helicopter deal is cancelled bcoz corruption is pointed out.crores are lost now.but the deal is gone.if gnn has taken money and delayed dg they have indulged in corruption and cheating the common public.this dg can become a symbol of corruption and cancelled


    Yes I agree, but we cannot compare it with Helicopter Deal, the issue here is also of more than 20Lacs population of city Ghaziabad, for which the same is needed.

    The issue here is to have a CBI investigation and punish the builders, who made illegal deeds to establish Crossings by a fraud and on barren land, which was of no use earlier and planned for Dumping Ground.

    This is a clear cut case of ill intentions and Fraud done with Crossing Innocent Buyers.

    High Court Case Verdict, aslo clearly mentions the need of waste management in Ghaziabad and in larger interest of population they allowed it at the same place. However they put hefty FINES on the builders like ansal and other lobby of builders, which caused delay in the DG. ( i guess 1 cr to 5cr each builder : not sure) So its clear that the land used for DG is being GRABBED by builders and have come up with big BLUNDER of Crossing Republik.

    My heart goes with innocent buyers of CR , but same point I also Agree most of the buyers in CR was aware of DG at the time of purchase of flat in CR, it was clearly mentioned by GNN, GDA at many times in print media, there were news about DG in local channels, there were rumorus in market about DG, the point is despite of all this if someone ignored it, its a sheer matter of ignorance or 'Kya hota hai sab chalta hai ' types attitude.
    CommentQuote
  • Originally Posted by sepulchar
    Yes I agree, but we cannot compare it with Helicopter Deal, the issue here is also of more than 20Lacs population of city Ghaziabad, for which the same is needed.

    The issue here is to have a CBI investigation and punish the builders, who made illegal deeds to establish Crossings by a fraud and on barren land, which was of no use earlier and planned for Dumping Ground.

    This is a clear cut case of ill intentions and Fraud done with Crossing Innocent Buyers.

    High Court Case Verdict, aslo clearly mentions the need of waste management in Ghaziabad and in larger interest of population they allowed it at the same place. However they put hefty FINES on the builders like ansal and other lobby of builders, which caused delay in the DG. ( i guess 1 cr to 5cr each builder : not sure) So its clear that the land used for DG is being GRABBED by builders and have come up with big BLUNDER of Crossing Republik.

    My heart goes with innocent buyers of CR , but same point I also Agree most of the buyers in CR was aware of DG at the time of purchase of flat in CR, it was clearly mentioned by GNN, GDA at many times in print media, there were news about DG in local channels, there were rumorus in market about DG, the point is despite of all this if someone ignored it, its a sheer matter of ignorance or 'Kya hota hai sab chalta hai ' types attitude.

    At one place you say CR buyers are not innocent & other place u pity the innocent buyers.Make up your mind jass_s.Oh sorry u made up your mind & sold your supertech in loss and are praying & trying hard so that SWMP comes...

    All the best..

    Builders have done a decent job...they have not allowed SWMp to come & they are still trying..

    Nobody wants this SWMP to come..not the builders, not the residents & not even the GNN...bas sab yahi chaahte hain ki naa aaye aur unki taraf koi ungli bhi naa uthaaye & this shall be done by court citing environmental issue & lack of enough space...
    CommentQuote
  • Dear Sepulchar/jass_s ..bachpan se sikhaaya gaya hai ki 2 wrongs never make a right ...even if court assume that it was all builders wrongdoing ..they cannot make another wrong by creating DG against UPPCBs directive. If UPPCB doesnt give NoC (which they should not after the public hearing and thousands of objections), SC mein itni dam nahin ki they can still order for a DG ...forget the 'innocent buyers' and 'utility for 20 lakh gzb' crap ...
    you had said yourself buddy that 'dekh ke makkhi nahin nigli jaati'..can SC do something like that ??..GNN has itself said in SC that all they have done is contruct a boundary wall for 6 cr and nothing else ...and you know what , GNN would be the happiest party if no DG comes as this area is small and totally unfeasible from DG perspective..and they can show a lot of loss (money they have eaten) if the DG gets stopped ..
    CommentQuote
  • Originally Posted by dkppatiala
    At one place you say CR buyers are not innocent & other place u pity the innocent buyers.Make up your mind jass_s.Oh sorry u made up your mind & sold your supertech in loss and are praying & trying hard so that SWMP comes...

    All the best..

    Builders have done a decent job...they have not allowed SWMp to come & they are still trying..

    Nobody wants this SWMP to come..not the builders, not the residents & not even the GNN...bas sab yahi chaahte hain ki naa aaye aur unki taraf koi ungli bhi naa uthaaye & this shall be done by court citing environmental issue & lack of enough space...


    Ultimately its the common man who has to struggle hard. You have your RWA and I hope they are strong enough because once the builders have sold their inventory in the region, they would not be seen around, let alone the case of fighting against DG. Builders have a selfish purpose behind delaying DG (unsold inventory) and buyers have their own (Lifelong Stay). But again remember, in the end its the people who can/will make the difference.
    CommentQuote
  • yesterdays SC order which was passed by a bench containing the Chief Justice of India himself ....And Ansal was represented by Gopal Subramaniam (i think everyone knows who he is )

    CORAM :
    HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE
    HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL R. DAVE
    HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIKRAMAJIT SEN
    For Petitioner(s) Mr. Gopal Subramanium, Sr. Adv.
    Mr. S.M.A. Kazmi, Sr. Adv.
    Ms. Mukti Chaudhry, AOR
    Mr. Sahil Chopra, Adv.
    For Respondent(s) Mr. Gaurav Bhatia, Adv., AAG
    No.1/State of U.P. Mr. Adarsh Upadhyay, Adv.
    Mr. Shantanu Krishna, Adv.
    For R-5 Mr. Sudhir Kulshreshtha, AOR
    For R-6 (UPPCB) Mr. Pradeep Misra, AOR (NP)
    For R-4 (G.D.A.) Mr. Ranbir Singh Yadav, AOR
    Ms. Anzu K. Varkey, Adv.
    UPON hearing counsel the Court made the following

    O R D E R

    On account of service of notice, all the
    respondents are duly represented.
    Both the respondents, the State of U.P., as well as
    the Municipal Corporation of Ghaziabad, are directed to
    file short affidavits, indicating the manner in which the
    area around the proposed Waste Management Project, is to
    be protected from any kind of pollution and the problem
    relating to health and hygiene.
    Let a copy of this order be intimated to the U.P.
    Pollution Control Board, the respondent No.6 herein, which
    is also directed to file a similar affidavit, as the other
    respondents.
    List the matter on Tuesday week (26.02.2013) at the
    top of the list, before the fresh matters.
    CommentQuote
  • Originally Posted by cradlecog
    yesterdays SC order which was passed by a bench containing the Chief Justice of India himself ....And Ansal was represented by Gopal Subramaniam (i think everyone knows who he is )

    CORAM :
    HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE
    HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL R. DAVE
    HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIKRAMAJIT SEN
    For Petitioner(s) Mr. Gopal Subramanium, Sr. Adv.
    Mr. S.M.A. Kazmi, Sr. Adv.
    Ms. Mukti Chaudhry, AOR
    Mr. Sahil Chopra, Adv.
    For Respondent(s) Mr. Gaurav Bhatia, Adv., AAG
    No.1/State of U.P. Mr. Adarsh Upadhyay, Adv.
    Mr. Shantanu Krishna, Adv.
    For R-5 Mr. Sudhir Kulshreshtha, AOR
    For R-6 (UPPCB) Mr. Pradeep Misra, AOR (NP)
    For R-4 (G.D.A.) Mr. Ranbir Singh Yadav, AOR
    Ms. Anzu K. Varkey, Adv.
    UPON hearing counsel the Court made the following

    O R D E R

    On account of service of notice, all the
    respondents are duly represented.
    Both the respondents, the State of U.P., as well as
    the Municipal Corporation of Ghaziabad, are directed to
    file short affidavits, indicating the manner in which the
    area around the proposed Waste Management Project, is to
    be protected from any kind of pollution and the problem
    relating to health and hygiene.
    Let a copy of this order be intimated to the U.P.
    Pollution Control Board, the respondent No.6 herein, which
    is also directed to file a similar affidavit, as the other
    respondents.
    List the matter on Tuesday week (26.02.2013) at the
    top of the list, before the fresh matters.

    cralecog..this is the same Ansal case for stay or some different case...

    I have flashed this to all in mailing list...good job..

    let us not respond to anything that sepulchar says on the new thread...let us delete all our comments from there..
    CommentQuote
  • Originally Posted by dkppatiala
    cralecog..this is the same Ansal case for stay or some different case...

    I have flashed this to all in mailing list...good job..

    let us not respond to anything that sepulchar says on the new thread...let us delete all our comments from there..


    yes..it is 12 Feb hearing (especially fast tracked for stay order ) which was uploaded yesterday
    CommentQuote
  • Originally Posted by cradlecog
    yes..it is 12 Feb hearing (especially fast tracked for stay order ) which was uploaded yesterday

    Thanks ...
    CommentQuote
  • QUESTION FOR sepulchar :

    After reading your emails it looks like you have done a lot of research on CR area and you really seems to have a very good understanding of the area and the current issues. Appreciate that !

    Hope to have more knowledgeable people like you in CR,

    BTW which society you own a flat in CR ???
    CommentQuote
  • Originally Posted by raghu2011
    QUESTION FOR sepulchar :

    After reading your emails it looks like you have done a lot of research on CR area and you really seems to have a very good understanding of the area and the current issues. Appreciate that !

    Hope to have more knowledgeable people like you in CR,

    BTW which society you own a flat in CR ???


    I never had any flat anywhere in Crossings, however friends of mine have in Mahagun and CR. I often did a research in CR in 2008, 2010, may 2011 onwards.
    CommentQuote
  • Originally Posted by sepulchar
    I never had any flat anywhere in Crossings, however friends of mine have in Mahagun and CR. I often did a research in CR in 2008, 2010, may 2011 onwards.


    Yes,you have put a lot of efforts in collecting information about CR and highlighting the issues.Please continue with that for benefit of IREF members.
    CommentQuote
  • Originally Posted by Krazy Yuppie
    Yes,you have put a lot of efforts in collecting information about CR and highlighting the issues.Please continue with that for benefit of IREF members.


    haan yaar ...thanks so much for the 5 year research on CR ..lets give the benefit to all IREF members
    CommentQuote

  • i never had any flat anywhere in crossings, however friends of mine have in mahagun and cr. I often did a research in cr in 2008, 2010, may 2011 onwards.


    then what the hell you are doing on this post ...you don't have anything else to do ...wasting your time in bashing other people homes
    CommentQuote
  • Originally Posted by raghu2011
    then what the hell you are doing on this post ...you don't have anything else to do ...wasting your time in bashing other people homes


    I wonder, on your intentions, Its forum and any body can be part of it. Would you mind it!
    CommentQuote