| 26-Dec-2024 |
DISPOSED |
Ar. Neeraj Gautam (Associate Architectural Executive) briefed the facts of the
case.
Sh. Manoj Tewari (AR) and Sh.
Inderjeet Singh (CEO) appeared on behalf of the promoter and request to condone
the delay. The AR of the promoter has submitted a reply dated 26.12.2024
wherein it is stated that the promoter had applied for respective applications
with the concerned departments, however, there was undue delay at the
respective departments which ended in the delay of approvals. It is stated that
the application for EC was made on 17.01.2024 and the same was on hold since
there was no Chairman in the department and no meeting was held. The
application was resumed after reinstatement of Chairman. A request letter dated
27.04.2024 for inclusion in the agenda was submitted to SEAC and the project
was taken up in the SEAC meeting dated 15.05.2024 and then SEIAA meeting dated
23.07.2024. The final environmental clearance was granted on 31.08.2024.
It is further stated that
the application for approval of service plans and estimates was made in the
last week of April 2024 and on 21.05.2024 the file was recommended by Executive
Engineer HSVP Gurugram. The file was further recommended from Chief Engineer
HSVP Chandigarh to DTCP on 05.07.2024 and the final approval was granted on
16.09.2024. There was no deficiency or shortcomings in the file, hence, the
delay was purely procedural internal delay in the department.
However, it is not disputed
that the promoter was granted conditional registration at its own accord and
depositing of security amount in the form of demand draft in lieu of submission
of the requisite clearances within the time specified in the conditional
registration. It was clearly mentioned in the registration certificate that
these DDs shall be forfeited in favour of Authority in case the conditions are
not fulfilled by the promoter within the stipulated time period.
In view of the above, the
security amount submitted in lieu of timely submission of environmental
clearance and approved service plans and estimates is hereby forfeited. The
security amount submitted on account of the approved fire scheme already stands
refunded as the same was obtained within the stipulated time. Since the
compliance has now been made, although with a delay, the case is filed.
Detailed order shall follow. |
ASHOK SANGWAN |
View Order |
02-Jan-2025 |