Wednesday, January 27, 2010


9868102781 (Cell) 9818233779 (Cell)

No. OEPHWA/GS/F-1/10/01 Dated 24-01-2010

Dear Members,

You are aware that Association has been fighting to safeguard the interests of plot holders since 1992. From the very beginning our motto has been very clear that the rights of genuine plot holders be safeguarded from every angle. First time we filed a Write Petition No. 876 before the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in 1996 which was disposed off on 7th April 1997. On its disposal, we had apprehensions that the colonizer might play dual role again with us and expressed the same before the Court. The Apex Court in its order directed that “Parties are at liberty to approach this Court in case of any difficulty for further direction.” Consequently, we approached the Court time to time to seek justice. It confirms the farsightedness of your Association.

The colonizer adopted fraudulent, divide and rule policy every time at every stage, various plot holder groups/associations fell prey to these tricky steps. Such groups have, instead, alleged us for non-cooperation. As and when we faced problems from Colonizer/Govt., on the basis of aforesaid direction, we approached the court. Other groups/associations interfered in our case; resulting in delays. This is the reason our poor genuine plot holders could not construct their houses on the allotted plots. In this context, we would also like to bring to your kind notice that the security amount of Rs. 3 Crore deposited in the year 1992 by the Colonizer with the Govt. of Haryana for carrying out requisite development work in colony has been withdrawn by the Colonizer from the bank with connivance/manipulation with some govt. officials on the pretext of orders of Addl. Metropolitan Magistrate of Patiala House, New Delhi. We immediately approached our counterpart groups/associations to take appropriate action in the matter but nobody came forward, they instead wrongly stated that the said money did not belong to them. My dear fellow plot holders, neither this money is of Govt. nor of Colonizer, but actually this was our hard earned money. In this recovery case, we had to incured about Rs. 1,25,000/-. However, through legal notice and after lot of pressure, we compelled the Govt. to file the case against Colonizer for recovery of Rs. 3Crore, ultimately the case was filed by the Director Town & Country Planning against Colonizer in Delhi High Court. We immediately intervened in the said matter and due to forceful argument of eminent Advocate of this Association, the Delhi High Court ordered the Colonizer to deposit Rs. 3 Crore. back to Govt. The Colonizer, instead, filed an appeal before the Hob’ble Supreme Court which is still pending.

Plot holders are unable to get the possession/NOC etc. to construct their houses despite of allotment order, sale deed in favour of plot holders by order of the Hon’ble Supreme Court, due to mal-intentions of Colonizer/ Govt. In our view, the working of colonizer remained doubtful and scandalous since beginning. As such, we were apprehensive that definitely there is some scam of land title. In this regard, we represented vide letter dated 25/02/1999 to Director Town & Country Planning Haryana (DTCP), Govt of Haryana requesting to enquire the title deeds submitted by colonizer of said land. As a result, Department of T & C Planning requested the Dy. Commissioner Faridabad to verify ownership documents of licensees. After lot of pressure the DC Faridabad sent a report on 09-02-2001 to DTCP stating that some land, which was part for which licence was issued, was not owned by licencees. He was further requested to verify the ownership. DC, Faridabad sent his report dt. 04.08.2003 along with copy of Memo giving licence-wise details of land in question. Meanwhile, through an insertion in Section 351-A in Haryana Municipal Act, 1994 by an amendment of 2001, all powers & functions of Director under Haryana D&R of Urban Areas Act, 1975 and rules framed there under stood entrusted to Commissioner Municipal Corpn of the Area (Faridabad) who sought details from Revenue Deptt. Faridabad regarding these licences, finding discrepancies about land ownership, he wrote to Commissioner & Secretary, Urban Development Deptt., Govt. of Haryana suggesting for appointment of Commission for making an enquiry vide letter dt. 25.07.2003 (all the correspondence is available with Association). Further Sections 351 & 351-A were omitted from Haryana Corporation Act, 1994 by the Govt. on 30.04.2004, thereafter entire records pertaining to licences of said colony were re-transferred to DTCP, Haryana vide OM dt. 16.04.04. Court Commissioner in his Report submitted to Hon’ble Supreme Court on 30.11.09 confirmed the above facts. It shows that your Association sincerely protected the rights of genuine plot holders. It is baffling that order of Hon’ble Supreme Court for issuance of NOC to plot holders were not complied with by Colonizer/Govt. During this period it came to our notice that the Colonizer is scandalously executing/creating third party sale of the already allotted plots without notice. We can’t say what action was being taken by other groups/associations as they had blamed us for non-cooperation. However, we finally decided to approach Hon’ble Supreme Court again.

Our motto is welfare of all genuine plot holders whether they are our members or not. In view of this, we prayed Hon’ble Supreme Court in August, 2008 for a thorough enquiry into the whole matter through a commission to safeguard the rights of plot holders. Hon’ble Apex Court considering the severity of problem agreed to our request and set up a Commission under the Chairmanship of Shri H.P. Sharma vide its order dated 21-10-2008 on the following issues:

1) How much of the land was and is in the ownership of Durga Builders Pvt. Ltd. and its sister companies in Okhla Enclave Colony Phase I & Phase-II Faridabad in respect of which licenses were granted by the respondent authorities.
a) In 1991-1992 when the licences to develo0p the colony were granted;
b) In 1996 when the present writ petitions were filed ; and
c) At present.

2) Identification of allottees entitled to the plot with appropriate details setting out the basis on which their entitlement has been determined.
3) Extent of development works already carried out with appropriate details.
4) Cost involved in carrying out the remaining development works with appropriate details.
5) Furnishing accounts of the money received by the respondent authorities from M/sDurga Builders and its sister companies.
6) Furnishing Account of the amount received by the Durga Builders and sister companies from Plot holders.

It is also brought to your kind notice that Hon’ble Supreme Court ordered us to bear 1/3rd cost of Commission’s expenses. We contacted other groups/associations to share the cost with us in the larger interest of all plot holders to achieve our goal but we received only a meager sum of Rs.48,000.00 as under:
Okhla Enclave Forum Rs. 43,000.00
Jan Kalyan Rs. 5,000.00
We would like to add here that about Rs. 2,25,000.00 expenses were incurred on the enquiry on different heads like Court Commissioner’s fee, transportation, photo copies, telephone, breakfast etc. etc.

Our fight with scamaster Colonizer and erring Govt. officials is at fruition stage. Therefore, at this juncture, we should all be united in all circumstance to achieve our goal. Although, efforts are on by other individuals to file the I.As before the Hon’ble Court in the aforesaid matter, this will only to delay the judgement and distract attention from main subject. We would like to appeal to all other Groups/Associations/Forums to be re-united for a forceful fight to achieve our target i.e. possession of long awaited plots with NOC to construct houses on them. Please remember Unity is Strength. All of you are aware that due to efforts of our Association, the case has come at final stage. If, due to slightest error on any Association’s part, we are not able to take the benefit of the present status of case, our members at large and our posterity will never excuse us. Need of the hour is unity among us. Let us have one voice, engage only one advocate who may argue in one voice against the Colonizer/ Govt.. in favour of plot holders. This suggestions to other Members/Associations is offered in the interest of all plot holders.

All members are curious to know the Court Commissioner’s Report. It’s not wise to burden you with unnecessary matter. We are enclosing important points/lines of the report separately for each point of reference to the Court Commission by the Hon’ble Court.

We would like to inform you that some of our members are pressing hard to open the membership for the plot holders who are still not member of any Association. The issue was discussed before the Executive Body in its meeting dated 17/01/2010 and it is decided that

i) Membership may be opened only for those members who are not member of any Association or have resigned from their Association.
ii) Such member has to abide by all the rules & regulations of this Association.
iii) Such member has to pay Rs. 3500.00 (Rs. 200.00 as Membership Fee, Rs. 300.00 as Admission Fee and Rs. 3000.00 as Legal Charges) to this Association.

The Membership Form is also attached herewith as Annexure-A.

The Executive Body in said meeting has resolved to increase the membership fee of old members with immediate effect. The old members has to deposit the membership of Current financial year @ Rs. 200.00. However, the members who have paid the membership fee of Rs. 100/= for the current year are required to deposit another Rs. 100.00 immediately.

We pay homage to our Ex-President late Sh. J S Malhotra who associated with us for a long time in this crucial battle. We thank to all our Office Bearers and Executive members for valuable support. We also thank the members for cooperation and advice if any.

At present we are busy in coordinating with Courts in connection with various cases pending in them. The Annual General Body Meeting of the Association, though due, will be called in future at a suitable time.

Our High Court Members who presented himself before the Court Commissioner & our Supreme Court petitioners who are still our member have been declared for entitlement of plots by the Court Commissioner. The annexure on the subject is still awaited. Next date of hearing is fixed for 22nd Feb. 10.

Your co-operation is our strength.

With regards,




1. NAME _______________________________

2. FATHERS’S HUSBAND’S NAME _______________

3. PERMANENT ADDRESS ___________________________

PIN ____________
4 CELL NO.________________ RES. NO.______________

a) Size_____s.y. b)Date of Booking ____c) Rate of booking____per s.y. d)Total Payment ________ i) cost of land____ii) development charges ____ iii) any other payment____ e) Alotted plot No.___
(with full detail viz. phase, block etc.)
6. Any other information____________________________________

I hereby declare
i) that till date I am not member of any Association or resigned from other Association.
ii) that I will abide all the rule & regulations of OEPHWA(Regd.) as a member.
iii) that I have not compelled anybody for membership.

Dated___________ Signature______________



In the matter of
WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) No. 876 of 1996

1. The Hon’ble Supreme Court vide its order dated 21-10-2008, appointing me as a Court Commissioner, wanted me to examine and submit a report on vaiours aspects – one being:-

3(i) How much of the land was and is in the ownership of Durga Builders Pvt. Ltd. And its sister companies in Okhla Enclave Colony Phase I & Phase-II Faridabad in respect of which licenses were granted by the respondent authorities.
a) In 1991-1992 when the licences to develo0p the colony were granted;
b) In 1996 when the present writ petitions were filed ; and
c) At present

10. On a representation dated 25.2.1999 by the petitioners – Okhla Enclave Plot Holders Welfare Association Delhi, sent to the Director, Town & Country planning Haryana regarding enquiry into the title deeds submitted by M/s. Durga Builders and assocate companies at the time of grant of licence, the Department of Town & Country Planning requested DC Faridabad sent a report dated 9.2.2001 which spoke of the licences not owing some lands which were a part of the land for which town & Country Planning had granted the aforesaid seven licences. ……….Commissioner, Municipal Corporation sought details from the Revenue Department Faridabad regarding these licences, and finding discrepancies about land ownership, he wrote to Commissioner & Secretary, Urban Development Department, Govt. of Haryana suggesting for the appointment of a commission for making an enquiry vide letter dt. 27.7.2003.

12 ……D.C. Faridabad deputed Addl. D.C. Faridabad for conducting this inquiry who gave the latest report dt. 16.2.2009 (Annexure-A-1) vide which Durga Builders Pvt. Ltd. And its associate were not found owner of land measuring 83 K and 14 M in licence No. 1 of 1991 and 14 K 11 M in licence No. 66 of 1992….

16 A lot of correspondence ws exchanged …… Office bearers of the petitioner Association were also joined in this inquiry. Association’s President late Mr. J.S. Malhotra and General Secretary Mr. M.P. Pandey with some Association Member did contribute a lot in this inquiry. Sadly, Association President Mr. J.S. Malhotra is no more now having left for his heavenly abode.

18. On checking the details of deficient land ..….this land was not under the ownership of the licensee. This is a major and shocking aspect and points to utter negligence on the part of Licencing Authority/Department of Town & Country Planning Haryana Govt. of Haryana. Mr. R.K. Nanda representing as M.D. of M/s. Durga Builders Pvt. Ltd. And associate companies was present during the discussion and inquiry who simply stated that he owned the land in question i.e. 14 K 9 M on the date of issuance of the licence and…..

23. By now it remains unexplained as to how the Town & Country Development Department processed and awarded licence no. 1 when records till date failed to establish that M/s Durga Builders Pvt. Ltd. Owned all the lands falling under licence No. 1 – to be specific - land measuring 14 K 9 M.

24. It is something very disturbing to see as to how the authorities granted a licence without proper verification and scrutiny of the land records as required under Sec. 3(2) of Haryana Development & Regulation of Urban Areas Act 1975. Mr. R.K. Nanda tried to explain that ….
26. This indicates that even now despite this long legal tussle revenue records in the office of D.C. Faridabad – still fail to confirm the above land as being owned by the licensees.

28. ……we see that land measuring 14 K 9 M was not in the ownership of the licences at the time these licencees were issued to them. …….now for the deficient lands, is a proof of the licensce’s ownership- that licences did not own land measuring 14 K 9 M.

29. Conflicting datas coming from the Town Planners’ office Chandigarh & DC Revenue Office Faridabad – further indicate that there is no coordination between these two important functionaries even on crucial subject affecting the fate of thousands of innocent plot buyers.

31. Non-observation of simple procedural aspects by both – Town Planners Deptt. Haryana & D.C. Revenue Office, Faridabad is an act of grave negligence and unwarranted official functioning – result of which is before us – really very pathetic & painful.

32. ……….. it subsequently and tried to remove the defect under some pressure under any circumstances – it hints to a serious defect in the working of the Town & Country Plananers Deptt. Haryana Govt.

3(ii) Identification of allottees entitled to the plot with appropriate details setting out the basis on which their entitlement has been determined.

49. Office bearers of various Plot Holders, Association including the petitioners’ Association wanted that claims/cases of their members- who were already on the list of petitioners in the present writ, or, whose names figured in the list under consideration by ……………..”allottees other than members of the “Petitioners Association/s”. Another important factor that weighted in my mind was that entitlement was to be determined as on date – when the order was passed as there were possibilities that many of the plot holders, association members or individuals, might have sold/transferred their right in favour of third parties – which fact – was very commonly seen by me during the identification process carried out during this enquiry.

50 I may mention that some of the lists submitted by plot holders Association – and, accepted/admitted by the builder, created problems when during a second manual checking by me, it was noticed (and also so admitted by the petitioner Association General Secretary Mr. M.P. Pandey ) that nearly 21 members (may be more as he said) had sold their plots to third persons, but, he was not very sure except in two cases. It be mentioned here that claims of members appearing in lists Annexure B-1 to B-4 – were admitted by the authorized representative of Durga Builders & Associate Cos.. Mr. Pandey was also not ready to endorse that lists of members submitted by him (Annexure B-1) to B-4) were giving a correct factual position or not. Mr. Pandey was asked to furnish phone numbers and addresses of the above said 21 members and others whom he was suspecting of their transferred to their plots/rights to third parties. Mr. Pandey was helpless here and stated that several of the Association members are now out of touch – having shifted to known places. He was told that it would be his responsibility now to see that some rightful claimant is not pushed in the category of a 2nd sale aspect be cause of his failure to highlight the names of members who have now transferred their title to a third party.

51. Another submission from the office bearers of the petitioner Association (Okhla Enclave Plot Holders’ Association) was that individual clai8mants should not be kkept at par with Association members and their cases be placed in a category where claims should be allowed only after the association members get their land/plots and, their turn should come only from the left out plot areas – after First satisfying the claims of members of contesting Associations. This pleas was based on ground that individual members are sitting comfortably in their homes, have not seen and faced the rigour of litigation and so, must not be considered at par with them. This submission was rejected outrighly as it carried no justification particularly when their legal right stand live.

52. For identifying the allottees entitled to a plot, their title deeds like booking receipts, allotment letters, sale Agreements and sale deeds were looked into as were produced b the claimants. Each applicant was also required to submit a notarized affidavit stating his booking/allotment/sale deed details, the amounts paid to the builder and the size of the plot. In cases where the applicant was a 2nd, 3rd or 4th buyer in sequence – all documents/title deeds leading to the final transaction – were checked and it was only thereafter that entitlement was Okayed. For claims of each applicant or group – the Builder who was represented by his authorized Agent Mr. Sanjay Tyagi (see Authorization letter Annexure B-5) – was also confronted and his confirmation was also recorded and got endorsed.

53. All accepted claims are determined and finalized as per the above basis. Several cases were detected where booking/allotment/sale agreements/sale deed had been made by the builder in one name initially, but subsequently, the same plot was sold to another person through a fresh sale agreement or conveyance deed under the grab of an order dt. 23.11.2000 passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court. This order, obviously, does not permit the builder to adopt his own free choice to resale of an already sold plot. All such applicants who were holding title deeds of such sales – have been notified in the entitlement list of ’2nd Sale’. Most Sale Agreements/Sale-Deeds of such claimants were executed from 2000 onwards till 2008-09.

54. I have neither accepted nor rejected their claims to the plots - because – my view on their entitlement is negative as at best, such applicant will have a right against the builder for a recovery/refund of their amounts paid to the builder. I further feel that the buyers under 2nd Sale category – having purchased these plots during a period- when this builder/Durga Builders and Associate Companies were in the grip of a stormy litigation – were well aware of the risk and seems to have gambled – fully knowing that the outcome could be a total loss or ‘if very lucky’ – then a fortune for them. The purchase price of such plots also is too low – if compared to the rates – normally prevalent in the area – during and around the purchase period. Since I am directed by the Hon’ble Court to decide – ‘Entitlement’ – I feel I shall not be exceeding my limits – in saying and holding, that, applicants falling in the 2nd Sale Category have no right at all to be considered in the current writ proceedings.

64. ……….An agreement dated 19.5.997 (is a part of Annexure B9) was mainly referred to by Mr. Arun Mehra to ultimately show that Nanda’s have transferred their entire share holding in his and his wife’s favour.

65. It remains a fact admitted by both sides that a lot of litigation has been going on between these two sides. Several documents were shown including plaints and written statement by both ….Hon’ble Delhi High Court at New Delhi seeking permanent injunction against Mr. R.K. Nanda and others asking them to be restrained from conducting any transaction or business in respect of Durga Builders Ltd. An interim order stands against Durga Builders restraining them from functioning acting or dealing with any movable or immovable properties of Durga Builders Pvt. Ltd. The basis for this suit required that Nandas had agreed to transfer 100% shareholding in M/s. Durga Builders Pvt. Ltd. Vide agreement dated 19.05.1997. ………….

66. Whatever transected between these two groups – it was clear that both have serious legal disputes pending in various Courts and these cannot be allowed to make them play this bull fight here to anyway damage the interest of a big number of genuine plot holders. To my mind – I feel that this legal battle between these two giants can be decided by regular competent Courts and not under this enquiry. ….. My finding thus comes – as rejected.

66(1) I deem it necessary to give details of the number of applications received from individuals or in group through Plot Holders’ Associations, which are as under:

Number of applications received from individuals & associations 5821
No. of applications accepted 2196
No. of applications covered under 2nd Sale 283
No. of applications Absent/Rejected/Duplicates 3342

67 Two types of development works have been mentioned …..internal development works(IDW) and external development works (EDW).

68. IDW ….responsibility of the colonizer, EDW are executed through HUDA.

70. As per information submitted ob behalf of Durga Builders and Associate Companies – no details were submitted regarding execution of internal development works except stating that an expenditure of Rs. 21.93 crores was incurred by the company on internal development works on both the phases of the Colony.
71. …..An inspection was carried out in the two phases in the presence of Distt. Town Planner Chandigarh, Ms. Gurmeet kaur, representing the Director Town & Country Planning Haryan , Area Tehsildar and some of the office bearer of Plot- holder Association. A team including engineers and architects was also involved with direction to visit the two phases and to examine the extent of internal development works carried out at the site, their present status and the extent of further development works needed for doing full internal development to the entire colony covering phase I & II both.

75. Nearly 50% of the site in Phase-II was reported having illegal construction with many portion ….. No water supply line was otherwise reported to have been laid in Phase-II.

80. The roads are in a very poor condition with…….

89. As per Ms. Gurmeet Kaur’s affidavit the department has incurred Rs. 1.50 Cr. On Horticulture & Electrical works Rs, 80.00 lacs on civil works and an amount of Rs. 3.62 Cr. Is already in the pipe line for being spent on EDW for this colony.

91. The cost of EDW as per the department comes to Rs. 160 per sq. yard and thus the total cost of IDW & EDW as per the department would comes to Rs. 626.53+ Rs. 160 making it Rs. 786 per sq. yard as per the current rates which may escalate over a period to time.

97. ………A substantial part of the land in Phase-II and some part in Phase-I were found having been encroached and ………..

98(1) It be not overlooked that Govt. Department has itself remained a major factor for delayed EDW.

99. The current estimated cost of Internal & External development should come to nearly Rs. 40,05,24,363/= for Phase-I & 39,97,51,300/= for Phase-II as per prevailing general market Rates.


100. Durga Builders & Associates Companies did not produce any record except letter dt. 13.3.09.. .. … it has been stated that an amount of Rs. 22.05 Cr. has been paid to the Director Town & Country Planning Chandigarh ….

102 As against the above, the office of Director & Country Planning has submitted the details of the deposits made by Durga Builders …….Rs. 18,27,38537/-

103 This figures of Total amount of Rs. 18,27,38,5371 was subsequently corrected by Town Planners Department vide their letter dt. 6.11.09 (Annexure C-2) as Rs. 19.67 crores including Rs. 1.75 crore received from the petitioners.

103 (i) There has been a shocking development when we see that the licencees have withdrawn the bank guarantee (Nearly Rs. 3.25 Crore). This indicates to the intention of the builder not being positive and healthy. The builder/licencees has to amend this ill act with any further delay.


105 As to what amount had been received by Durga Builders and sister companies is a question ……… Records of Builder company were not produced as these were said to be under Court Custody and lock and seal of the Hon’ble High Court. No further details were provided, however if we go with the written reply from Durga Builders, then this amount stands at Rs. 46.68 crores.

106. The amount paid by the plot holders whose cases are verified and accepted or are covered under 2nd Sale in this enquiry –comes to Rs. 28.64 crores approximately. Amounts of Rejected claims are not included.

107 Giving information on this point the builder has given stories of refunds or expenses which do not seem carrying any relevance here.

109. A list containing names of applicants covered in the entitlement list excepting number of multiple applicants is annexed at the end of this report.


  1. Respected Pandey gi namaskar Today I came to know about okhla enclave plot holders assotion I want to join this assotion My all documents submited before the Mr H.P SHARMA(COURT-COMITIOSIONER)what I have to do for joining Dr Anil vasistha

  2. We have booked one plot in the nameof my wife,when I was in Delhi (employed in ACC) and paid all the money as and when asked by Durga Builders. Now I am retired. I want to take membership of the association to represent my case. My email is We expect your early reply

  3. as i searched for long time came to know about this association .my father purchased a plot from durga builders and paid full amount. now he is no more pl advise what to do .t.i want to become member of this association
    santosh phone no=9868464662

  4. I am also searching for long time want to know about this association .my father in law also purchased a plot from durga builders and paid amount Rs. 88,650/- in the year 1994.we had all orignal reciept. now he is no more please advise what to do. Please inform Sachin Gupta-9871073053/

  5. please mentioned the address of Durga Builders and Contact No.

  6. What is the status of this case now

  7. What is the status of this case now

  8. This comment has been removed by the author.

  9. This comment has been removed by the author.