Dear GD,
Nice to see concern raised by you.
Do find my inputs in RED Below.
Anyways my suggestion would be not to discuss legal matters on mail. You are always welcome in our society GBM or call us for any clarity. The related question are discussed in our GBM every month.
You can also come & join CROMA meeting every month.
Regards
Saikat
From: mascotrwa@googlegroups.com [mailto:mascotrwa@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of GD
Sent: Monday, July 09, 2012 9:23 AM
To: mascotrwa@googlegroups.com
Cc: mascotrwa-eb@googlegroups.com; Mahagun Mascot; cromaexecutivebody@googlegroups.com; info@croma.org.in
Subject: [RWA-Mascot:1147] Re: [Mascot RWA Executive Body-685] Re: [CROMA Executive Body] Appeal for your support-Dumping Ground Issue-Filing of Special Leave Petition in Supreme Court
No reply from Mascot CROMA executives??
Forwarding to all CROMA Executive members... Kindly go through the mail chain and clear my doubt.
Thanks
GD
On Sunday, July 8, 2012 8:03:15 AM UTC+5:30, GD wrote:
Builder's case [and intention] is already different. Moreover they have not a new case in supreme court. Rather they are challenging the 'lost case' in high court; for which 99% chance is that 'Builders will loose again' [because of their ill-intention]. If you read high court verdict carefully, you will find that there were some points related to health hazard too from builders in the argument. But, somehow it was not given weight-age [may be because the lawyer did not argue well, or the overall 'intention' of the case was 'land-grabbing']
My main point is that 'Why we are so eager to join builder's lobby?' If you could reply below concerns point-wise, it would be great.
1 - What is the problem in going NGT, just to get their interim order on DG. Since GNN is already in the process of building the DG [Walls are erected, some work is already done], this is absolutely OK to go NGT at this moment. – We can only go to NGT when we are effected by DG & that is only possible only when GNN start pouring waste in that area. Only construction doesn't signifies the cause to fight against or proceed with legal proceedings with GNN. Till date Pollution board has not given NOC for the project. If the case is lost in Supreme court then we can go to NGT for environmental issues & environmental NOC.
2 - Why not we can go in high court for an interim stay on DG. Technically, our case is altogether different than what builder fought, it would be treated as new issue 'on the same land'. – Builders have already filed petition in Supreme court where Crossing lawyer has also highlighted the DG as concern for the township. So any order from Supreme court will hold good against High court against DG
Have we discussed about the above option with lawyers. Is there any solid reason given for not opting any of the above?
I don't question lawyer's advise, but many of them cares for their 'pocket' more... They simply don't care on what will happen, if one wrong move leads to defeat.. So, its better that we be fully informed, that what are our best options!
-GD
On Saturday, July 7, 2012 11:14:57 PM UTC+5:30, pathak sujoy wrote:
Hi GD,
Your concerns are valid, Let me brief you about this. As we all know that builders already lost the case in High Court which they have fought for Land usage and the builder challenge the High Court's decisions in Supreme Court, if they loose that case in Supreme Court as well and if DG is allowed to start, then even we put up the case in High Court, Supreme Court's decision will stay on top and at that time we will not be in the position to do anything out of all efforts.
CROMA has consulted many lawyers and the best option find to move forward in this direction, they have suggested to be aparty on the same case where we are filing the case on environmental background, Health background and various acceptable criteria for forming DG which are not present in this case; these all will strengthen the case. This will going to make this case strong.
Moreover various RWA's and members from various societies in CR attached as party for this case. So we are trying the best possible way to move forward after all discussion with various SC lawyers. I think this will clarify some doubt from your mind. Now we need everyone's support to move this forward.
Hoping to get everyone's support for this. Let me know if you have any more question on this.
Thanks & Regards,
Sujoy
On Sat, Jul 7, 2012 at 7:44 AM, GD wrote:
I feel that I should elaborate my concern in historic sense, as I am very much concern about our move to be right only. We simply can't afford to fail. So, we must take decisions carefully.
As per my understanding:
1 - Builder fought a case against GNN/GDA, whose main focus was to 'grab GNN land i.e. dumping ground land'.
2 - As expected, builders lost the case; as it was a clear nexus of GDA-Builder to grab GNN land.
3 - Builder never fought the DG case as 'issue to environment' and health hazard of residents.
4. Then they decided to challenge the case in Supreme Court, which I don't see any merit. Their intention is not removing DG for health hazard; but to stop it coming till the time their sell out everything [Specially Ansal projects]. So, it just a time pass. They are going to loose again.
5. We had decided in our' last year/early this year' meetings that we will never club our case with Builder's case in supreme court.
6. If needed, we will file a fresh case in High court purely on the basis of 'Bye-Laws of Dumping Ground' and 'Health hazard to a dense population'.
7. I believe that we can file case in high court at any time, unless GDA/GNN back out from building DG completely. We can simply take a pre-emptive decision that GNN/GDA 'decision' to build the dumping ground itself is invalid. We may not need to actually wait for DG to take off for this. We can simply challenge their plan.
8. Going to High court was also important, as we will still have option open to go into Supreme court. If we lost the case in supreme court, we will have all doors closed.
9. Similarly, can't we go to Green Tribunal just challenging their 'plan' to build the DG before even going to Courts. Winning in NGT will make our case full proof.
1O - Do, we needed to wait for any action to happen before going to NGT? We can simply go like 'See NGT, this authority is planning for a DG here, which is wrong'.
All I mean to say, that our move should be:
- Go to NGT, challenge the plan. [What can happen, at the most NGT will say that we will intervene only if actual execution of plan will start. Then its fine, we will wait.]
- Go to High court just challenging DG on health ground. Take the stay and fight.
- Go to supreme court, in case we loose in high court. Ideally we will win in high court itself.
GD
On Saturday, July 7, 2012 7:17:14 AM UTC+5:30, GD wrote:
Any Specific reason that why we are not going for a fresh case in High court as 'Resident vs GNN' for stopping DG? This will spare us another option to go into Supreme court, in case things are not in favor in High court?
I don't understand the logic behind attaching residents with builder's case, where it is very much evident that the builder's original case is out of their greed [to grab GNN land] and they can not win the same in any court.
Please let me now, if I am understanding it wrong, in the context of filing a SLP [Special Leave Petition].
=GD
On Friday, July 6, 2012 5:55:13 PM UTC+5:30, contactus wrote:
Dear Mascotians,
Please look into the appended mail sent by the CROMA President - Mr. Gurmukh Singh. CROMA is filing the Special Leave Petition in Supreme Court for Dumping Ground issue on coming Monday (9th July 2012).
From Mahagun Mascot RWA, we support this activity to fight on this novel cause hence me as a PRESIDENT of this society is going to be a Party/Petitioner in the Special Leave Petition. I will complete the document work tomorrow so that it will be filed on Monday i.e. 9th July 2012.
Let me know if you have any question.
Regards,
Raj Kumar Raju
President, Mahagun Mascot RWA
Crossings Republik, NH-24
Ghaziabad (U.P.)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: CROMA Moderator <info@croma.org.in>
Date: Wed, Jul 4, 2012 at 4:43 PM
Subject: [CROMA Executive Body] Appeal for your support-Dumping Ground Issue-Filing of Special Leave Petition in Supreme Court
To: membersaps@gmail.com
Cc: cromaexecutivebody@googlegroups.com
Dear Valued President-RWA/ Office-Bearers & Representatives/Adhoc Group
This is to bring to your knowledge about the current development through news paper reports /articles including Hindustan Times dated 18.06.2012 and Times of India dated 29.06.2012, whereby it transpires that GNN has written letter to Greater Noida Authority for acqusition of land in Chippiyana adjacent to Dundahera to cover lacunae's of the compliances and documents for Dumpyard Issue. The latest move of Greater Noida Authority for change of Master Plan by considering the land in village Chippiyana for Soid Waste Management plant indicate the start of process of giving new shape to this Dumping Menace. GNN has already awarded license for construction of this DG at Dundahera and propose to complete the construction by end of this year as reported from various new paper reports.
Even though the matter is sub-judice in the Supreme Court of India by pendency of builders petition , the Ghaziabad Nagar Nigam (GNN) has started construction and awarded private contract even without taking a proper Environmental Clearance which is in our knowledge through news paper and via media sources.
Just to recollect the back ground history about the matter for your knowledge that Ghaziabad Master Plan 2021 was finalized in year 2005, the entire area of village Dundahera was earmarked as residential zone and accordingly development licenses were granted to private developers like Crossings Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. and Ansal Properties & Infrastructure Ltd. By way of a notification dated 21.10.2009, the then State Government of U.P. restored 2003 master plan for land usage of 14 acres land in village Dundahera, Ghaziabad to landfill to help establish the Municipal Solid Waste Management Scheme (Dumping Ground / Landfill). This notification was challenged by the builders in Allahabad High Court, but their petition was dismissed by HC vide judgment dated 30.08.2011 with some adverse remarks against builders as well as GDA. The HC judgment has been challenged by builders in Supreme Court on which hearing is fixed for 23.07.2012.
After the High Court Judgement, CROMA had written representation to the Ministry of Environment and Forests (MoEF) for their intervention in this regard. Also CROMA brought the fact of public hearing which was conducted by UP Pollution Control Board on 20.04.2010 regarding Environment Clearance (EC) for setting up of this Dumping Ground before the MoEF. However till date, no proper cognizance or action has been taken by MoEF on this issue. Any construction or land preparation without EC is against procedures and illegal as per Environment laws of the land.
With this backdrop, last month the CROMA Executive Body met with some good advocates of Supreme Court, deliberated on the entire issue, strategy to fight this menace and finalized anAdvocate on Record – Mr. Praveen Kumar who advised to file a separate petition in Supreme Court on behalf of residents at the earliest.CROMA may also approach National Green Tribunal regarding Environment Clearance as and when sufficient cause of action will arise to make our petition admissible at NGT.
As we all appreciate, litigation at Supreme Court and NGT is going to be a lengthy and costly affair, (senior lawyers charge 1-2 lakhs for each appearance) CROMA Executive Body hereby appeal to each and every present and future resident/flat-owner to make contribution for this cause. A fund collection drive is going to start very soon. All the RWAs and ad-hoc associations of different societies are requested to extend their full support, with their valuable time and effort, to CROMA Executive Body for this fund collection. We are planning to raise a sum of around Rs 10,00,000/- (Ten Lakhs only) at present which should help to meet litigation cost for next few months to engage Senior Advocate to argue our case on behalf of residents.Senior Advocate in Supreme Court charge fee per hearing which is an expensive affair to deal with.
As always, CROMA Executive Body will keep all the residents updated about the state of drafting and filing of the petition and also about the future developments in the case to all the residents from time to time on its website i.e. www.croma.org.in and yahoo group mail ID's
CROMA requests all the residents/flat-owners to make a minimum contribution of Rs. 500/- (Five Hundred Only) per flat to build this corpus for funding the litigations at Supreme Court and NGT.
I also request to your Group/RWA to confirm that whether your Group/ RWA, if any, or any individual member of your society who is comfortable to be add as Party/Petitioner in the Special Leave Petition please give their name and address as it is very urgent to close the draft for filing the petition. We are proposing to file the petition by coming Monday i.e. 9.07.2012.
Note:
1) The mode of payment will be preferably by CHEQUE in favour of Crossings Republik Flats Owners & Members Association.
2) For payments by cheque, the receipt will be provided by the respective fund collection committee.
CROMA executive member(s) and other members/residents belonging to your society is(are) already aware of most of the details of the legal steps that CROMA team has planned. However, if you feel the need, CROMA executive committee members will be more than happy to have a meeting with residents/RWA members of your society at mutually convenient time.
Look forward your support for the cause and your confirmation at the earliest.
Warm Regards,
Gurmukh Singh,
President-CROMA
Crossings Republik Flats Owners & Members Association (CROMA) [Regd.]
The information contained in this message may be confidential and legally protected under applicable law. The message is intended solely for the addressee(s). If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any use, forwarding, dissemination, or reproduction of this message is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by return e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message.
