पतवाड़ी के किसानों का लिखित समझौता
जागरण संवाददाता, ग्रेटर नोएडा किसानों के साथ समझौते की दिशा में ग्रेटर नोएडा प्राधिकरण को बृहस्पतिवार को बड़ी सफलता हासिल हुई। पतवाड़ी गांव के किसानों के साथ प्राधिकरण का समझौता हो गया। इससे बिल्डरों व निवेशकों को बहुत बड़ी राहत मिली है। समझौता भी किसानों के लिए फायदेमंद रहा। उन्हें अब 550 रुपये प्रति वर्गमीटर अतिरिक्त मुआवजा देने पर सहमति बन गई है। साथ ही आबादी व बैकलीज की शर्तो को हटा लिया गया है। हालांकि नोएडा के सेक्टर-62 में गुरुवार को देर रात तक अन्य मुद्दों पर प्राधिकरण व किसानों के बीच बातचीत जारी थी। इलाहाबाद हाईकोर्ट ने 19 जुलाई को पतवाड़ी गांव की 589 हेक्टयेर जमीन का अधिग्रहण रद कर दिया था। अधिग्रहण रद होने से सात बिल्डरों के प्रोजेक्ट प्रभावित हुई हुए थे। 26 हजार निवेशकों के फ्लैट का सपना भी टूट गया था। प्राधिकरण के ढाई हजार भूखंड़ों, चार सौ निर्मित मकानों व दो इंजीनियरिंग कॉलेज की योजना भी अधर में लटक गई थी। 26 जुलाई को हाईकोर्ट ने नोएडा एक्सटेंशन के अन्य गांवों की सुनवाई के दौरान प्राधिकरण, बिल्डर व किसानों को 12 अगस्त तक आपस में समझौते करने का सुझाव दिया था। हाईकोर्ट के सुझाव पर प्राधिकरण ने किसानों से समझौते के लिए वार्ता की पहल शुरू की। 27 जुलाई को प्राधिकरण के सीईओ रमा रमन ने सबसे पहले पतवाड़ी गांव के प्रधान को पत्र भेज कर वार्ता करने के लिए आमंत्रित किया। दूसरे दिन ग्राम प्रधान रेशपाल यादव ने प्राधिकरण कार्यालय पहुंच कर सीईओ से बातचीत कर उनका रुख जानने का प्रयास किया था। 30 जुलाई को सीईओ ने गांव पतवाड़ी जाकर किसानों से सामूहिक रूप में बात की। इस दौरान मुआवजा वृद्धि को छोड़कर किसानों के साथ अन्य मांगों पर प्राधिकरण ने सकारात्मक रुख दिखाया। मुआवजा बढ़ोतरी पर बातचीत करने के लिए किसानों को आपस में कमेटी गठित कर वार्ता का प्रस्ताव सीईओ दे आए थे। इसके बाद किसानों के साथ गुरुवार को नोएडा के सेक्टर-62 में बैठक बुलाई गई। इसमें प्राधिकरण के सीईओ रमा रमन, ग्रामीण अभियंत्रण मंत्री जयवीर ठाकुर, सांसद सुरेंद्र सिंह नागर व जिलाधिकारी के साथ किसानों की वार्ता शुरू हुई। आठ घंटे तक वार्ता चलने के बाद किसान समझौते के लिए तैयार हो गए। सूत्रों के अनुसार पतवाड़ी गांव के किसानों को मिले 850 रुपये प्रति वर्गमीटर के अलावा 550 रुपये प्रति वर्गमीटर और देने पर सहमति बन गई है। देर रात तक बैठक जारी थी। अभी इसकी अधिकारिक घोषणा नहीं की गई है। हालांकि गांव के कुछ किसानों ने वार्ता की पुष्टि की है। इससे पूर्व किसानों की आबादी को पूरी तरह से अधिग्रहण मुक्त रखा जाएगा। बैकलीज की शर्ते हटा ली जाएगी। पतवाड़ी गांव का समझौता होने पर प्राधिकरण को नोएडा एक्सटेंशन के अन्य गांवों में किसानों के साथ समझौता करने की राह आसान हो गई है। नोएडा एक्सटेंशन विवाद ने रोके खरीददार : नोएडा एक्सटेंशन विवाद ने समूचे ग्रेटर नोएडा एवं यमुना एक्सप्रेस वे प्राधिकरण क्षेत्र में संपत्तियों की खरीद-फरोख्त पर ब्रेक लगा दिया है। दोनों जगह ढूंढे से भी खरीददार नहीं मिल रहे हैं। कुछ समय पहले तक जो लोग शहर में अपना आशियाना बनाने के लिए आतुर थे, वे अब यहां संपत्ति खरीदने से हिचकिचा रहे हंै। पिछले बीस दिनों में भूखंड व मकानों की गिनी-चुनी रजिस्ट्री हुई हैं। सिर्फ गांवों में कृषि व आबादी भूमि की रजिस्ट्री हो रही है। इससे प्रदेश सरकार को राजस्व की भी हानि उठानी पड़ रही है
-Dainik Jagran.
Read more
Reply
16355 Replies
Sort by :Filter by :
  • Originally Posted by asuyal1
    good news lagti hai... shayad 9 sep se shuru ho raha hai kaam :bab (59):


    ye 9 tarikh kaha se aayi ?
    CommentQuote
  • Originally Posted by Sunder_Lal
    ye 9 tarikh kaha se aayi ?


    9th Sep is the date by when farmers have warned to stop all the work at NE again, if their demands are not honored by Authority :bab (45):
    CommentQuote
  • Originally Posted by Deep2605
    hi sanju,
    i booked in Dec'11, rate was lesser than as of today. i booked arround 2500 PSF in GC16 for 10th floor.


    Deep,

    I too visited the gaur office last week but they refused that any price hike for me. (bought in jan 2012). NO BBA signed as ws nt possible.

    I believe apka bhi BBA nhi bana hoga. N rahi baat rates ki toh pahle parking charges alag tha 1 laks- Open n now its included in BSP toh humne toh pahle hi bade rate me lia hai.

    10 cent bhi bahut jada ho jayega for end user.

    Also whch tower u hv booked. M booked in 11th floor so asking:D
    CommentQuote
  • Hurdles remain in Noida Extension

    The clearance of Greater Noida Master Plan 2021 by the NCR Planning Board is definitely a big hurdle removed from the path of development. But this alone doesn't guarantee a trouble-free future for Noida Extension.

    Farmers of several villages have moved the Supreme Court against a high
    court decision which upheld land acquisition. The high court last year ordered increased benefits to farmers. But the farmers, whose land has been acquired, want their land back.

    "The cases could go either way. The issue of master plan approval will be relevant only when the apex court does not set aside land takeover and the land remains with builders," admitted a senior government official.

    "The authority should have waited for the Supreme Court order before allowing builders to start construction," said a group of residents which has written to the state government against the "hasty" commencements of realty projects. "How can banks resume home loan lending when the land title is to be decided in the highest court of the country," they have asked.

    "What if the (apex) court gives a verdict favoring the farmer? Will it not again sound the death knell for projects? Will not the hopes and aspirations of hundreds of investors be shattered once again? Will it not initiate a disastrous chain reaction of financial losses?" the group has asked in the letter.

    Kisan Sangharsh Samiti (KSS), an umbrella body of farmers, said, "We have moved the Supreme Court seeking our land back. So we're not bothered about the master plan approval. Land acquired forcibly for industrial development cannot be used for realty projects.

    "The authority doesn't have developed land to give to farmers. The court ordered we must get 10 per cent share in land acquired and developed as post-acquisition rehabilitation benefits. But it (the authority) has allotted almost the entire residential land to builders and buyers," the letter said.

    A senior authority official admitted it was difficult to allot 10 per cent developed land to farmers as this would disturb the balance of the master plan which allows only 21 per cent of the total land to be used for residential purposes.

    "The tussle will continue as the authority has only 340 hectares of residential land left while the (residential) land requirement is about 800 hectares," said a farmer leader.

    Hurdles remain in Noida Extension - Hindustan Times
    CommentQuote
  • anybody knows kon 2 se banks loan de rhe hain??? n hows amrapali dream valley project? is it risky to invest in this project.?
    CommentQuote
  • Originally Posted by nebuyer10
    Earth is not accepting any payment without interest@18% on delayed payment, saying it's not zero period. Demand was generated in the month of march11 before that period.



    My letter doesnt say anything like that..i think its may be due to the payment of two installments by me which were before the zero period thing...
    CommentQuote
  • NEFOMA update

    A letter to Mr. Kamalnath

    To
    Shri Kamal Nath
    Union Cabinet Minister of Urban Development,
    Govt.Of India,
    1, Tuglak Road,New Delhi - 110 011

    Dear sir,

    It is a great pleasure to communicate with you through this letter in which we would like to extend our warm “Thank You” to you for approving the Master Plan of 2021 of Greater Noida. Sir, you have indubitably extended your great help in approving this plan and saving lakhs of middle class families’ hard earned money. Since the land controversy arose, we were under the great depression for losing out our valuable money and dream of having our own homes in Noida and Greater Noida. We were the bona fide buyers hence the land controversy was beyond our understanding. When we booked our homes we did not know that there is an existence of any dispute pertaining to any project there. It is truly a great step taken by you to help us keep our hopes alive for our own dream homes.
    We wish to share with you a few more problems which we are coming across as the Builders are now exploiting us by threatening to cancel our already books flats so that they can resale the same for much higher prices now.
    Companies like the Supertech, Palm Olympia and Earth Infrastructure are trying to make more profits by cancelling the booking of existence buyers on the pretext of not being paid an amount of 10 per cent of total cost. We would like to your notice that allotment letters were issued by the builders only after the buyers paid them 10 per cent of total flat cost.

    Hundreds of buyers are complaining that they were not given any prior notice and the cancellation of their flats was done by the builders arbitrarily to earn profits on enhance prices of flats in the area now.

    Palm Olympia sent demand letters by adding more interest rates and threatened buyers that they will convert the Flexi Plan into CLP plan if flat buyers do not pay an increased amount immediately.

    In this regard the members of Noida Extension Flat Owners and Members Association (NEFOMA) had a meeting and sent a letter to the CEO of GNIDA Mr.Rama Raman. The NEFOMA group with more than 5000 members strongly opposed the move of increasing the FAR in Noida Extension projects. Please note that the increase in FAR will result in more density and higher towers/flats which will result in congested spacing between the towers. More numbers of flats will have larger population than the area can accommodate. This will lead to water and environmental inconveniences to the flat owners. The risk during natural calamity like earthquakes will also increase. Also the additional expansion due to increased FAR will delay the projects further.

    NEFOMA on the behalf of all the Noida Extension flat buyers request you to look into the matter in the welfare of the buyers and ensure that Builders withdraw the increased FAR with immediate effect. We would be highly obliged to you as we are already being exploited to its fullest by our respective Builders.

    Regards.
    On behalf of Noida Extension Flat Owners and Members Association (NEFOMA)

    Annu Khan
    President
    CommentQuote
  • Originally Posted by Manish1604
    anybody knows kon 2 se banks loan de rhe hain??? n hows amrapali dream valley project? is it risky to invest in this project.?

    I got letter from amrapali,that bank of Maharashtra financing there projects in NE,

    Means amrapali will send next demand letter to buyers soon....
    CommentQuote
  • It has been a blessing in disguise for those builders who were not able to sell well earlier. Now they might be having more inventory to sell at higher rate without the hassle of cancelling the flats for old buyers or increasing the rate for old buyers.
    CommentQuote
  • Originally Posted by deltaa
    It has been a blessing in disguise for those builders who were not able to sell well earlier. Now they might be having more inventory to sell at higher rate without the hassle of cancelling the flats for old buyers or increasing the rate for old buyers.


    sahi keh rahe ho .. builders like gayatri aura will benefit .. they hadnt sold much earlier
    CommentQuote
  • Good observation, Gupta-ji.

    Originally Posted by ManGupta
    Around 2 Years (or maybe more) back I came across a discussion in IREF that how it was bad since the FAR of Noida Extension is being increased from 1.75 to 2.75.

    I have enclosed a part of your third PDF which mentions that Maximum permissible FAR of 2.75 is Under revision. The decision of the State Government shall be final in the matter. Means at that time FAR of 2.75 was not yet sanctioned.

    It must be at the same time (perhaps 2009) when builders were lobbying for FAR increase to 2.75.

    CommentQuote
  • Originally Posted by fritolay_ps
    "The cases could go either way. The issue of master plan approval will be relevant only when the apex court does not set aside land takeover and the land remains with builders," admitted a senior government official.


    Within one week, newspapers have changed the tune totally. :bab (59):
    A week back most of news items, conveniently forget to mention SC cases.
    :bab (45):

    CommentQuote
  • Originally Posted by FieldWorker


    Within one week, newspapers have changed the tune totally. :bab (59):
    A week back most of news items, conveniently forget to mention SC cases.
    :bab (45):



    Newspapers have done their part. Builders must have got new buyers with positive news without mentioning SC cases. After few weeks, again they will create news by making SC cases upfront. Buyers will get panic, NE will get more publicity and in the end when everything will get settle by SC, rates will be 3500 psf.
    CommentQuote
  • Originally Posted by hindustan
    Newspapers have done their part. Builders must have got new buyers with positive news without mentioning SC cases. After few weeks, again they will create news by making SC cases upfront. Buyers will get panic, NE will get more publicity and in the end when everything will get settle by SC, rates will be 3500 psf.


    Absolutely correct analysis.

    One way or another, create crisis and increase prices. :bab (45):
    CommentQuote
  • Why SC will not cancel NE land aquisition

    All,

    We all know that post NCRPB approval, apart from start of construction, bank loan etc., the most pertinant question which is being tossed around is cases in SC. I personally believe SC will not cancel NE land aquisition and below are my facts which make me believe so. Comments, feedbacks and brickbats are welcome but pls dont accuse me of being a broker, builder agent, etc. these kind of statements are simply sick.

    1) Shahberi Verdict - Most of the people i have heard here or in news when talking abount NE cases, try to relate the current situation with that of Shahberi, saying that since SC cancelled the land aquisition of Shahberi they will do the same for rest of NE. This statement if theoritically wrong. SC did not cancel land aquisition of Shahberi, it was actually Allahabad HC which had cancelled the land aquisition and SC had only upheld the HC verdict dismissing the appeal filed by GNOIDA.

    2) Shahberi land aquisition was cancelled because of change in land use and use of emergency clause. This is factually wrong. Shahberi land aquisition was cancelled because only 30% of landowners had taken the compensation. This was contradictory to the land aquisition act 1894. This is also made clear second time around in the HC decision of 21st October 2011.

    3) Authority had taken the land for industrial use and changed the land use there after - Authority did use the emergency clause which is legal if the land is to be taken for institutional / industrial use. Authority also reserves the right to change the land use post land aquisition provided they provide the same % of land for industrial use in some other area under their supervision. GNOIDA authority was well within its legal rights to use emergency clause and subsequently change the land use. (though it is morally and ethically wrong in my POV). Infact, NOIDA authority has changed the land use of a tract of land in Sec 63 just about a couple of weeks back from institutional to residential as they had to give developed land back to farmers (news in Amar Ujala). So GNOIDA is not a weak wicket on this point as well.

    4) I also tried to compare how SC has dealt with a similar land aquisition case which is under its purview currently which is the Singur Land Aquisition, West Bengal.

    > New WB government enacts Singur Land Aquisition Act which makes in mandatory for Tata Motors to return 400 acres of land which was apparantly forcibly taken by the earlier government
    > Tatas challenge this act in HC, single bench of HC upholds the government Act and ruled against tatas
    > Tatas challenge this verdict to a larger bench of Kolkatta HC. The larger bench rules in favour of Tatas and says Singur LA Act is illegal.

    This is almost like the NE land cases, wherein we can juxtapose Tatas with GNOIDA and WB government with the farmers.

    Anyways, the difference comes in SC.

    > WB government appeals to SC. SC issues notice to Tatas to respond to the petition served by WB government. However along with this they also STAY Kolkatta HC order.

    Lets see what SC did for NE cases:

    > SC issues notices to GNOIDA, NOIDA & UP government to respond to petition filed by farmers. BUT, IT DOES NOT STAY HC RULING. I am sure SC judges would surely know that based on HC verdict, construction can resume in NE post NCRPB approval. But they still did not stay the HC order

    > Moreover, based on GNOIDA petition, they stayed a part of the HC order - enahnced compensation & return of 10% developed land to farmers. But they still did not stay the rest of the HC order.

    My POV is, if SC would have wanted they could have easily stayed the HC order just like the Singur case, but they did not. This is a big positive atleast for me.

    Lastly, I dont think anyone knows how many farmers have actually filed cases in SC. We only hear about 100 SLPs have been filed. Well if out of over 6000 farmers in NE, even if 100 or 200 do file the cases, it just doesnt add up for cancelling the NE land aqusition.

    As I said earlier, feebacks, comments & brick bats are welcome. And I would really appreciate if some legal expert amongst us could spare some time in reading this long essay by me and give his / her views.

    Cheers / Leo
    CommentQuote