A lot of companies are advertising for property citing nearness to Dwarka expressway corridor.

Shilas, Indiabulls Centrum Park and Ramprastha Edge Tower come to mind.

Does anybody have news on when this construction will start and when it is likely to finish? Has the contract been awarded and to whom?
Date of completion and start of operation will be vital news for evaluating the pricing of flats sold in this corridor.

Last I heard was that a few houses in Palam Vihar were slated for demolition for this expressway in May June 09 or thereabouts.
Read more
Reply
19888 Replies
Sort by :Filter by :
  • Huda claims Dwarka e-way on track, confident to overcome legal hiccup

    GURGAON: Despite unfavourable order from Punjab and Haryana high court virtually putting brake on Dwarka Expressway, Haryana Urban Development Authority (HUDA) is confident to overcome the latest legal hurdle and complete the project.

    The much-delayed high-speed road connecting Gurgaon and Delhi has hit another stumbling block with court staying the allotment of alternative plots to people displaced by theexpressway project. One of the oustees challenged Huda's denial of benefits to him on the pretext that his plot had been lying vacant, had moved court.

    Preparing to present their view before court on next hearing on November 7, when Huda is hoping to get relief from HC, urban development body claims that alternative plots were allotted to oustees in accordance with the terms and condition of final terms of settlement (FTS) prepared under the supervision of HC.

    "The plots were allotted in accordance with FTS, which was reached between oustees and Huda under guidance of HC. FTS has clearly mentioned that oustees with GPA and SPA will also be allotted alternative plots," said Huda administrator Yashpal Yadav adding that draw will stand the scrutiny of court and work on completion of Dwarka Expressway will progress as planned.

    Terming the recent HC order as a small hiccup, which they are confident to overcome on next hearing, Yadav said they will bring to the notice of court that FTS, under which GPA and SPA oustees were given alternative plots, was prepared on the direction of HC. "We are quite hopeful that after considering all these fact court will vacate the stay," said Yadav.

    The petitioner, Satyendra Singh, claimed he was denied the benefit of Huda's oustees' policy as his plot was lying vacant, while allotment of alternative plots were made to GPA and SPA holders.

    "According to rehabilitation policy of state government, which has been accepted by oustees, open plot holders are not eligible for alternative plots. Only people who have constructed houses are given alternative plots," said Yadav.

    He said HC in Sandeep Singh vs state case HC had ordered that open plot holder has no right and cannot be given alternative plots. The order was later approved by SC as well. Following state has come up with oustees policy under which 12% of plots of upto 8 marla and 10% of plots size more than 8 marla was reserved for oustees.

    "According to oustees policy if there are 100 applications for 10 available plot reserved for oustees, Huda will allot plots through lucky draw. It is not necessary that all oustees will get plot, available plots to be given through lucky draw," said Yadav adding that in the case of Dwarka Expressway they have followed the policy of state government and FTS.

    Huda has allotted 269 alternative plots to the expressway project oustees, including general power of attorney (GPA) and special power of attorney (SPA) holders, through lucky draws. The oustees are from New Palam Vihar, Kherki Daula and Chauma village. The authority says it has finished the allotment process. It chose from a pool of 465 applicants.


    CommentQuote
  • CommentQuote
  • Originally Posted by Khalsa
    Huda claims Dwarka e-way on track, confident to overcome legal hiccup

    GURGAON: Despite unfavourable order from Punjab and Haryana high court virtually putting brake on Dwarka Expressway, Haryana Urban Development Authority (HUDA) is confident to overcome the latest legal hurdle and complete the project.

    The much-delayed high-speed road connecting Gurgaon and Delhi has hit another stumbling block with court staying the allotment of alternative plots to people displaced by theexpressway project. One of the oustees challenged Huda's denial of benefits to him on the pretext that his plot had been lying vacant, had moved court.

    Preparing to present their view before court on next hearing on November 7, when Huda is hoping to get relief from HC, urban development body claims that alternative plots were allotted to oustees in accordance with the terms and condition of final terms of settlement (FTS) prepared under the supervision of HC.

    "The plots were allotted in accordance with FTS, which was reached between oustees and Huda under guidance of HC. FTS has clearly mentioned that oustees with GPA and SPA will also be allotted alternative plots," said Huda administrator Yashpal Yadav adding that draw will stand the scrutiny of court and work on completion of Dwarka Expressway will progress as planned.

    Terming the recent HC order as a small hiccup, which they are confident to overcome on next hearing, Yadav said they will bring to the notice of court that FTS, under which GPA and SPA oustees were given alternative plots, was prepared on the direction of HC. "We are quite hopeful that after considering all these fact court will vacate the stay," said Yadav.

    The petitioner, Satyendra Singh, claimed he was denied the benefit of Huda's oustees' policy as his plot was lying vacant, while allotment of alternative plots were made to GPA and SPA holders.

    "According to rehabilitation policy of state government, which has been accepted by oustees, open plot holders are not eligible for alternative plots. Only people who have constructed houses are given alternative plots," said Yadav.

    He said HC in Sandeep Singh vs state case HC had ordered that open plot holder has no right and cannot be given alternative plots. The order was later approved by SC as well. Following state has come up with oustees policy under which 12% of plots of upto 8 marla and 10% of plots size more than 8 marla was reserved for oustees.

    "According to oustees policy if there are 100 applications for 10 available plot reserved for oustees, Huda will allot plots through lucky draw. It is not necessary that all oustees will get plot, available plots to be given through lucky draw," said Yadav adding that in the case of Dwarka Expressway they have followed the policy of state government and FTS.

    Huda has allotted 269 alternative plots to the expressway project oustees, including general power of attorney (GPA) and special power of attorney (SPA) holders, through lucky draws. The oustees are from New Palam Vihar, Kherki Daula and Chauma village. The authority says it has finished the allotment process. It chose from a pool of 465 applicants.




    Lets hope HUDA Administrator knows what he is doing and his decisions will stand the test.
    CommentQuote
  • I just went through the order dated 03-10-2016. It has two interesting aspects.

    1. Hon'ble High Court directed Huda not to issue allottment letters & possession of alternate plots to oustees.
    Acquisition of land/house of oustees, falling under Dew, has not been stayed. Only question left to be decided that after acquisition whether X is entitled to just money or alternative plot which is fair.

    2. Petitioner claimed that GPA/SPA holders were wrongly allotted plots though they had no valid title, in contravention of case. Hon'ble High Court has also put this query to Huda.
    This was the same argument I put few months back on this very forum that GPA/SPA does not confer any title. Thus, GPA/SPA holders cannot be granted alternative plots.

    Its good that this issue will get resolved with the intervention of the Courts and no ambiguity will be left.



    CommentQuote
  • Originally Posted by ashok1984
    I just went through the order dated 03-10-2016. It has two interesting aspects.

    1. Hon'ble High Court directed Huda not to issue allottment letters & possession of alternate plots to oustees.
    Acquisition of land/house of oustees, falling under Dew, has not been stayed. Only question left to be decided that after acquisition whether X is entitled to just money or alternative plot which is fair.

    2. Petitioner claimed that GPA/SPA holders were wrongly allotted plots though they had no valid title, in contravention of case. Hon'ble High Court has also put this query to Huda.
    This was the same argument I put few months back on this very forum that GPA/SPA does not confer any title. Thus, GPA/SPA holders cannot be granted alternative plots.

    Its good that this issue will get resolved with the intervention of the Courts and no ambiguity will be left.





    Hi Ashok, possible to share the order here? It will be good to have it. Thanks
    CommentQuote
  • Here, it is.
    CommentQuote
  • Originally Posted by ashok1984
    I just went through the order dated 03-10-2016. It has two interesting aspects.

    1. Hon'ble High Court directed Huda not to issue allottment letters & possession of alternate plots to oustees.
    Acquisition of land/house of oustees, falling under Dew, has not been stayed. Only question left to be decided that after acquisition whether X is entitled to just money or alternative plot which is fair.

    2. Petitioner claimed that GPA/SPA holders were wrongly allotted plots though they had no valid title, in contravention of case. Hon'ble High Court has also put this query to Huda.
    This was the same argument I put few months back on this very forum that GPA/SPA does not confer any title. Thus, GPA/SPA holders cannot be granted alternative plots.

    Its good that this issue will get resolved with the intervention of the Courts and no ambiguity will be left.





    Yes, it actually might clear a lot of ambiguity finally, if the courts decide fast and give a ruling/judgement same day about the validity.
    The FTS has to be seen in this context as well, what was agreed under the court supervision last year..Petitioner cannot go back on the FTS done last year, and start demanding something else. Looks like a case of sour grapes!!
    If GPA/SPA holders cannot be given alternate plots, then only compensation could be given and that's them done with. They cannot go to SC, since it was already decided long back about the same in SC in the other case.
    If they can be given as per the FTS, then problem solved.
    HUDA & AG should have all the documents, facts and replies ready for both the possibilities, so that the case can be dealt with and work resumed.



    CommentQuote
  • I don't understand what is the benefit or loss for DEW flat buyers if HC or HUDA is providing the compensation or alternative plots to the GPA/SPA holders. Do you think they have not bought that piece of land they are staying in. Why those coming in line of DEW to be unlucky and not thousands of other GPA/SPA house owners in NPV and lacs in whole Gurgaon.
    OK, lets be agree to the point that GPA/SPA holders should not get the alternative plots. So what is the option before corrupt HUDA. They can't simply grab that land and make the road on it. NO, HUDA need to find out the original owner/farmer of the land who is holding the paper/ registry of that land. And who is that owner? He is someone who already sold his land and earned the money. So here many of the greedy people who has thrown their money for a 1500 sq feet of area somewhere don't know which floor, wants the land owners to vacate their land as free.
    Don't say them greedy and don't be greedy.
    Be noted, I am one of the buyer who has thrown the money somewhere and don't know which floor.
    Here only to blame someone is only Govt/ HUDA, not individual. And someone who allow the construction on the plots after notification.
    If government is fair, why they don't widen the exiting 100 feet wide Bhajgera road and could have completed the ROB few years back where there is no litigation.
    CommentQuote
  • Originally Posted by BRapria
    I don't understand what is the benefit or loss for DEW flat buyers if HC or HUDA is providing the compensation or alternative plots to the GPA/SPA holders. Do you think they have not bought that piece of land they are staying in. Why those coming in line of DEW to be unlucky and not thousands of other GPA/SPA house owners in NPV and lacs in whole Gurgaon.
    OK, lets be agree to the point that GPA/SPA holders should not get the alternative plots. So what is the option before corrupt HUDA. They can't simply grab that land and make the road on it. NO, HUDA need to find out the original owner/farmer of the land who is holding the paper/ registry of that land. And who is that owner? He is someone who already sold his land and earned the money. So here many of the greedy people who has thrown their money for a 1500 sq feet of area somewhere don't know which floor, wants the land owners to vacate their land as free.
    Don't say them greedy and don't be greedy.
    Be noted, I am one of the buyer who has thrown the money somewhere and don't know which floor.
    Here only to blame someone is only Govt/ HUDA, not individual. And someone who allow the construction on the plots after notification.
    If government is fair, why they don't widen the exiting 100 feet wide Bhajgera road and could have completed the ROB few years back where there is no litigation.


    I don't think you are totally correct in your view point. If Huda had to grab land of someone to build road, then that would have occured ages ago. But, its not like that.

    But yes, you are right that GPA/SPA don't have legal right to get alternate plot as GPA/SPA is no document of title in view of Suraj Lamp case held by the Supreme Court. I raised this point few months back but naturally Huda buckled under the pressure of agitating oustees having GPA/SPA and allotted them alternate plots through draw and in present scenario, there are very high chances that High Court may also now that GPA/SPA are not entitled for alternate plots. Irony is that, another oustee i.e. Petitioner in the current CWP turned out to be their demon.
    CommentQuote
  • Waiting to hear from Mr Highway.............
    CommentQuote
  • Originally Posted by ashok1984


    I don't think you are totally correct in your view point. If Huda had to grab land of someone to build road, then that would have occured ages ago. But, its not like that.

    But yes, you are right that GPA/SPA don't have legal right to get alternate plot as GPA/SPA is no document of title in view of Suraj Lamp case held by the Supreme Court. I raised this point few months back but naturally Huda buckled under the pressure of agitating oustees having GPA/SPA and allotted them alternate plots through draw and in present scenario, there are very high chances that High Court may also now that GPA/SPA are not entitled for alternate plots. Irony is that, another oustee i.e. Petitioner in the current CWP turned out to be their demon.


    Not agree sir,
    If HUDA is this much of influential, who was stopping HUDA to provide the alternate plots to registry holders. They should have provided it AGES ago.
    Secondly, we are fighting for DEW, which we should. But question is what about existing roads, are they in good condition. No, they are in bad condition. 30 feet road connecting to 75 meter road was constructed two years back and damaged badly for last one year. Who is stopping HUDA or PWD to repair it. There are people already started living in the area.
    It is a much bigger nexus which common man can't understand easily. Modi is happy if nothing stay back in Gurgaon and reach Ahmadabad.
    "Yahan traffic jam lagte nahi hain, lagaye jate hain"
    The only option for DEW buyers is protest protest and protest ..... and you need people for that
    CommentQuote
  • Originally Posted by ashok1984
    Here, it is.


    Thanks for this document. It clarifies that what was touted as victory of Litigants is at best acceptance of objections and can go either ways. and there are no thousands of litigants

    Beyond this, it is up to the court and legal framework to judge the case by its merit. This is far from the negative development that it was made out to be
    CommentQuote
  • As per information 4 new cases were filled by approx. 800 outsses in a group of around 200 each
    CommentQuote
  • Originally Posted by ultichakri
    As per information 4 new cases were filled by approx. 800 outsses in a group of around 200 each


    What do they want at the end of day. or in as simple terms as possible.
    CommentQuote
  • Originally Posted by ashok1984


    I don't think you are totally correct in your view point. If Huda had to grab land of someone to build road, then that would have occured ages ago. But, its not like that.

    But yes, you are right that GPA/SPA don't have legal right to get alternate plot as GPA/SPA is no document of title in view of Suraj Lamp case held by the Supreme Court. I raised this point few months back but naturally Huda buckled under the pressure of agitating oustees having GPA/SPA and allotted them alternate plots through draw and in present scenario, there are very high chances that High Court may also now that GPA/SPA are not entitled for alternate plots. Irony is that, another oustee i.e. Petitioner in the current CWP turned out to be their demon.


    Suraj Lamp case pertains to its applicability to prior transactions. Question is whether judgment has prospective applicability only. An unnecessary confusion has arisen on this count. Hon’ble Supreme Court made some very interesting observations in one case .Two separate opinions were pronounced by the Court in the said case, one by Justice K.S. Radhakrishnan and the other concurring opinion by Justice Vikramajit Sen.


    Note the observation of Justice Vikramajit Sen which is as under:

    “I have perused the judgment of my learned and esteemed Brother Radhakrishnan, and I entirely and respectfully agree with his conclusion that the appeal deserves to be allowed. My learned Brother has succinctly analysed the sterling judgment in Suraj Lamp and Industries Private Limited vs State of Haryana (2009) 7 SCC 363, which has been rendered by a Three-Judge Bench of this Court. I completely concur with the view that since General Power of Attorney (GPA) in favour of the Appellant was executed and registered on 12.05.2006, it could not be impacted or affected by the Suraj Lamp dicta.Furthermore, a reading of the order of the Executing Court as well as of the High Court makes it palpably clear that both the Courts had applied the disqualification and illegality imposed upon GPAs by Suraj Lamp, without keeping in mind that the operation of that judgment was pointedly and poignantly prospective. This question has been dealt with by my esteemed Brother most comprehensively.

    What has also escaped the attention of the Court is that Suraj Lamp has prospective operation, thereby rendering it inapplicable to the subject 2006 transaction.”

    It appears that Justice Vikramajit Sen has not only said that the judgment in Suraj Lamp is prospective but has also indicated that Justice Radhakrishnan said the same thing.

    “Learned counsel submitted that in the final judgment which is reported in Suraj Lamp and Industries Private Limited (2) Through Director v. State of Haryana & Anr. (2012) 1 SCC 656, this Court has clarified the position that the judgment would not affect the validity of sale agreements and powers of attorney executed in genuine transactions and that the judgment would operate only prospectively.”

    Be that as it may, Justice Vikramajit Sen has declared the Suraj Lamp ratio as prospective. If a court pronounces majority and minority judgments then the observations made in minority judgment are not binding. But if strength of bench is two and both the judges pronounce different but concurring opinions, both will be binding. So if Justice Vikramajit Sen holds the Suraj Lamp ratio as prospective, the same has to be treated as binding unless some other precedent or interpretation exists contrary to that opinion.
    CommentQuote