Monitoring committee does not have scope in post second master plan: town planners

Monitoring committee does not have scope in post second master plan: town planners
C Shivakumar
Chennai:
Association of Professional Town Planners and Institute of Town
Planners India has questioned the role of High Court appointed
monitoring committee in post Second Master Plan stating that the
committee was appointed to examine the issues arising out of
regularization of unauthorized and deviated constructions which had
come up to the the period 2000 – 2002 during the First Master Plan.

The statement by the two professional town planners association comes
in the wake of sealing of commercial establishments in T Nagar by
Chennai Metropolitan Development Authority after the suggestions by
the monitoring committee.

ITPI sources said that upon approval of the Second
Master Plan, it is CMDA and Corporation of Chennai to look after the
regular approval of planning permission and enforcement action and
monitoring committee does not have scope.

APTP president K M Sadanandh alleged that from the published minutes
of the meeting it
could be ascertained that monitoring committee is not focusing on the
subject matter and the responsibilities vested with it in the August
2006 order.

“It is diverting to other issues including providing opinion for
demolition of unauthorised constructions made after July 2007, T Nagar
Redevelopment Plan and about 1057 cases the High Court has issued
orders for providing service connections without insisting on
Completion Certificate and the monitoring committee’s decision to file
Writ Appeals against such High Court order,” he said, adding that he
has written to the secretary of housing and urban development and
vice-chairman of CMDA and convenor of the monitoring committee.

Sadanandh said the Monitoring Committee should have been assisted
by a multi-disciplinary team, full-time working, time-bound service
with scientific approach in ascertaining the issues of the
unauthorized construction or building violation and the nature of its
occurrence considering socioeconomic, psychology, geographic,
political and public health engineering aspects.

Interestingly some of the members like A Srivatsan and Durganand
Basalvar are not urban planners, neither by qualification nor by
practice and their designation mentioned as ‘urban planner’ misleads
the court, monitoring committe, government, general public, and other
real professionals including town planners, as if the required town
planning inputs are made in the Monitoring committee, Sadanandh
observed.

He also said Justice S Mohan Committee had submitted its report for
making Amendments in Tamil Nadu Town and Country Planning Act 1971a
year ago.  “The outcome of the amendments need be disclosed or
finalised prior to initiating any action by MC,” he said.

It is ascertained from the published minutes of the meetings that the
Monitoring Committee meetings held 40 times over the period of 5 years
(six minutes of the meetings & Action taken reports are not published)
and over 45 persons representing six Departments (Official members)
had attended the  meetings so far at 7 persons per department.  None
of the official-members of the monitoring committee representing the
six departments are continuing at present, he added.

While the overall attendance of the MC members are about 62.5 per
cent, (Official members 65.5 per cent and non-official members 61 per
cent), about 16 meetings were held with 50 per cent to 25per cent
members of monitoring committee attendance without knowing the chorum,
APTP said.