After 13 years Palm Beach Residency gets provisional OC on court order
NAVI MUMBAI: Thirteen years after it was constructed, the upscale Amey Cooperative Housing Society Limited's (ACHSL) Palm Beach Residency in Nerul has received a provisional occupancy certificate (OC) from the Navi Mumbai Municipal Corporation (NMMC). The complex, which was mired in litigation due to construction violations of over 3 lakh sq ft, has had to bear a whopping ₹100 crore for the OC, with ₹66.67 crore paid to NMMC and around ₹34 crore to CIDCO for various permissions.
The project has been mired in controversy for decades. First there were allegations of illegalities in the land allotment process by CIDCO to six 'bogus' cooperative societies of APMC mathadis that had been merged, which then sold the land to the Wadhwa group. After being cleared by the Supreme Court, when the project was finally completed in 2012, FSI violations were reported, following which NMMC refused to issue an OC.
Social activist Sandeep Thakur filed a PIL in the Bombay high court in 2018 for action against those responsible for illegal occupation of the buildings. The society too filed a writ petition seeking permissions.
The HC in October 2024 permitted NMMC to take a decision with regard to regularisation of the building. NMMC passed an order on December 31, 2024, agreeing to grant an OC, subject to payment of penalty, additional premium and other conditions. As an interim measure, the court on March 4 permitted the deposit of the amount to NMMC, asking it to issue the OC which, it stated, would be provisional in nature and subject to further orders.
Somnath Kekan, assistant director of town planning, NMMC, said that the introduction of the new Unified Development Control and Promotion Regulations, which permit additional FSI, had enabled the regularisation. Uma Ahuja, chairperson of ACHSL, said that the residents were 'keeping it low-key, as we believe that this is the time to maintain calmness and composure'.
Thakur, however, said the provisional OC was subject to the court's previous rulings, which prohibit any sale or purchase of the units. 'It is also subject to the confirmation of validity of 'consent to operate' from MPCB, which is conducting an inquiry,' he said. 'The society does not have environmental clearances, and we will take up the issues concerning permissions given by MCZMA and SEIAA in the next hearing on July 8. We will plead for the cancellation of the provisional OC.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Time of India
10 hours ago
- Time of India
Special court closes Powai land case against Niranjan Hiranandani, others
MUMBAI : A special court Monday closed criminal proceedings against developer Niranjan Hiranandani and others in the alleged Rs 30,000 crore Powai Area Development Scheme (PADS) land scam case. The judge observed that prosecuting the accused would not be in keeping with justice and that there was no prima facie case after the state Anti-Corruption Bureau submitted a closure report saying there was no evidence of corruption, monetary gratification, dishonest intention, or criminal conspiracy. The case relates to allegations that prime public land leased at concessional rates for affordable housing was diverted to construct luxury real estate and commercial premises by private developers, notably Niranjan Hiranandani, managing director of the Hiranandani group . "Having perused the closure report, I find that no material or anything incriminating, which could connect the accused…with the alleged crime has been found…in my opinion it would thus, be futile to unnecessarily prosecute the accused.., sans any material against them," special judge Shashikant Eknathrao Bangar said in a 119-page order made available on Tuesday. The judge said the closure reports are based on cogent investigation, verified compliance, and supported by judicial orders of the Bombay high court. Pointing to the HC's orders in three related PILs alleging breach of agreement with govt and misuse of FSI and development rights, the judge said allegations concerning breach of affordable housing obligations, amalgamation of flats, and sale of flats were conclusively examined and remedied. The judge noted that the high court had constituted a three-member joint committee to verify compliance and accepted reports in 2016 and 2017, which confirmed that out of 2,200 flats of 80 sqm, 1,337 were constructed, 12 locked, and 887 remained to be completed as per the plan and timeline. "The directions for completion of the remaining flats were passed with monitoring provisions. Any further breach or non-compliance was made subject to the court's ongoing supervision, obviating the need for separate criminal proceedings…the ACB rightly concluded that no prosecutable offence remained. There was no material to show abuse of public office or conspiracy," the judge said, adding that the probe was a 'fair' one. The ACB, through public prosecutor Ramesh Siroya, submitted before the court that sale of larger flats and amalgamation, though deviating from the spirit of the Agreement, was retrospectively regularised through the high court hearing the PILs. The agreement dated 19 Nov 1986, was executed between the state, MMRDA, and the developer for an area of 232 acres. Based on activist Santosh Daundkar's plea alleging that Hiranandani and others were involved in irregularities in the housing project, a court in 2012 ordered a probe. The ACB filed an FIR against Hiranandani and senior urban development department officer Thomas Benjamin and others under the Prevention of Corruption Act and the IPC. In 2013, the ACB sought to close the case on the grounds that there wasn't sufficient evidence. Daundkar opposed the move. The ACB's closure report, which was rejected by the court on Jan 4 2018, led to a directive for further investigations. Following this, a second closure report was submitted on Aug 30, 2019. Daundkar challenged this report too and sought a reinvestigation. He alleged malafide transfer of the investigating officer, who was purportedly preparing to file a chargesheet against top officials and the builder. Daundkar argued that the final report was a result of administrative interference and suppression of crucial material. He contended that the final report is based heavily on the HC's civil PIL orders and ignores criminal aspects. He sought a fresh probe by an independent agency. The ACB said the allegations were not supported by documentary evidence or witness statements. "There are around 8,000 residents (approx) residing in PADS. None of the residents have filed any criminal complaints over the years pertaining to the development carried out in PADS," it submitted. It also pointed out that Daundkar had neither purchased any commercial premises nor was a resident or investor in the development. The judge rejected Daundkar's plea against the closure report, saying it reiterated allegations already considered in PILs and brought no new substantive material.
Time of India
16 hours ago
- Time of India
Spl court closes Powai land case against Hiranandani
Mumbai: A special court Monday closed criminal proceedings against developer Niranjan Hiranandani and others in the alleged Rs 30,000 crore Powai Area Development Scheme (PADS) land scam case. The judge observed that prosecuting the accused would not be in keeping with justice and that there was no prima facie case after the state Anti-Corruption Bureau submitted a closure report saying there was no evidence of corruption, monetary gratification, dishonest intention, or criminal conspiracy. The case relates to allegations that prime public land leased at concessional rates for affordable housing was diverted to construct luxury real estate and commercial premises by private developers, notably Niranjan Hiranandani, managing director of the Hiranandani group. "Having perused the closure report, I find that no material or anything incriminating, which could connect the accused…with the alleged crime has been found…in my opinion it would thus, be futile to unnecessarily prosecute the accused.., sans any material against them," special judge Shashikant Eknathrao Bangar said in a 119-page order made available on Tuesday. The judge said the closure reports are based on cogent investigation, verified compliance, and supported by judicial orders of the Bombay high court. Pointing to the HC's orders in three related PILs alleging breach of agreement with govt and misuse of FSI and development rights, the judge said allegations concerning breach of affordable housing obligations, amalgamation of flats, and sale of flats were conclusively examined and remedied. The judge noted that the high court had constituted a three-member joint committee to verify compliance and accepted reports in 2016 and 2017, which confirmed that out of 2,200 flats of 80 sqm, 1,337 were constructed, 12 locked, and 887 remained to be completed as per the plan and timeline. "The directions for completion of the remaining flats were passed with monitoring provisions. Any further breach or non-compliance was made subject to the court's ongoing supervision, obviating the need for separate criminal proceedings…the ACB rightly concluded that no prosecutable offence remained. There was no material to show abuse of public office or conspiracy," the judge said, adding that the probe was a 'fair' one. The ACB, through public prosecutor Ramesh Siroya, submitted before the court that sale of larger flats and amalgamation, though deviating from the spirit of the Agreement, was retrospectively regularised through the high court hearing the PILs. The agreement dated 19 Nov 1986, was executed between the state, MMRDA, and the developer for an area of 232 acres. Based on activist Santosh Daundkar's plea alleging that Hiranandani and others were involved in irregularities in the housing project, a court in 2012 ordered a probe. The ACB filed an FIR against Hiranandani and senior urban development department officer Thomas Benjamin and others under the Prevention of Corruption Act and the IPC. In 2013, the ACB sought to close the case on the grounds that there wasn't sufficient evidence. Daundkar opposed the move. The ACB's closure report, which was rejected by the court on Jan 4 2018, led to a directive for further investigations. Following this, a second closure report was submitted on Aug 30, 2019. Daundkar challenged this report too and sought a reinvestigation. He alleged malafide transfer of the investigating officer, who was purportedly preparing to file a chargesheet against top officials and the builder. Daundkar argued that the final report was a result of administrative interference and suppression of crucial material. He contended that the final report is based heavily on the HC's civil PIL orders and ignores criminal aspects. He sought a fresh probe by an independent agency. The ACB said the allegations were not supported by documentary evidence or witness statements. "There are around 8,000 residents (approx) residing in PADS. None of the residents have filed any criminal complaints over the years pertaining to the development carried out in PADS," it submitted. It also pointed out that Daundkar had neither purchased any commercial premises nor was a resident or investor in the development. The judge rejected Daundkar's plea against the closure report, saying it reiterated allegations already considered in PILs and brought no new substantive material.
Time of India
3 days ago
- Time of India
Gujarat government's new policy to enable cross-city transferable development rights
AHMEDABAD : The state govt is putting together a new redevelopment and Transferable Development Rights (TDR) policy that will, for the first time, create a regional development rights market in Gujarat . The policy framework proposes an inter-city TDR framework, allowing cross-city transfer of development rights in Ahmedabad, Surat , Vadodara , Rajkot and other urban centres while addressing various urban challenges. Currently, TDR certificates allow developers to build over and above the permissible floor space index (FSI) under prevalent rules by purchasing unused development rights from other properties or vacant land. "Usually, TDR systems operate within individual municipal boundaries. The new policy's inter-city framework means that a developer in Ahmedabad could potentially use TDR certificates generated from land in Surat. This creates a regional development rights market for the first time," said the UDD official. A senior official from the urban development and urban housing department (UDD) revealed that landlocked properties that cannot be developed due to access or regulatory constraints will be taken up, adding that the new redevelopment and TDR policy will open the floor for solutions to urban challenges like housing through slum redevelopment, repurposing closed factories for modern use, optimizing utility of transport hubs, and converting idle govt land into productive use. City-specific committees will streamlineand fast-track approvals and also oversee the policy's execution . "The policy reduces govt's financial burden by incentivizingdevelopers to undertake redevelopment projects. We will use data analytics to identify optimal redevelopment opportunities," the official added. "The policy will provide TDR rules specific to each redevelopment type," the senior UDD official said. He added, "The policy will define eligible areas, establish valuation methods, and lay down the issuance and usage guidelines. A robust monitoring mechanism will ensure transparency and measurable progress." Officials added that the policy will also consist of special implementation guides — similar to those used in Maharashtra — to aid both civic bodies and developers. TDR has been used in Maharashtra, including Kolhapur, to preserve heritage buildings by compensating owners who are restricted from redeveloping or modifying their properties. These owners receive TDR, which they can sell to developers, thus monetizing their development rights without altering the heritage site.
