Chandigarh periphery act-

. INTRODUCTION

1.1 The Chandigarh Periphery Controlled area was created with the twin objectives of

ensuring a planned future expansion of the New Capital City and to prevent mushrooming of

unplanned construction around it. The Punjab New Capital (Periphery) Control act, 1952

accordingly aimed at regulating the use of land and preventing unauthorized and unplanned

urbanization in a 16 kilometre periphery.

1.2 Since then, planned satellite townships of SAS Nagar (Mohali) and Panchkula have

come up in the Periphery in addition to a large cantonment. Further in 1990, the State

Government declared an area of 10,000 Acres near Dera Bassi, falling within 23 villages of

Patiala district, to be a Free Enterprise Zone (FEZ), where the setting up of industries was to

be permitted.

1.3 Notwithstanding the regulatory framework, enforcement has been patchy.

Appreciating the emerging ground realities, the Punjab Government had in 1998 decided to

permit an across-the-board regularization of all unauthorized constructions, which had

already come up within the Periphery up to and including 7.12.1998. Simultaneously, it was

also decided to evolve a policy framework which would permit the setting up of institutions

related to education, health etc., with low density of built-up area, within the Periphery, apart

from permitting activities related to leisure and tourism.

2. THE COMMITTEE

2.1 Accordingly, a Committee headed by the Chief Secretary was constituted by the State

Government in its order of September 10, 2003 to suggest an appropriate and transparent

policy framework for the Periphery.

2.2 Taking cognizance of this Committee, the Hon�ble Punjab and Haryana High

Court in Civil Writ Petition No. 14357 of 2002 directed:

(i) that the Committee should critically examine the problems and bottlenecks in the

proper development of Periphery and to suggest a policy framework which would ensure

planned development of the area;

(ii) that the issue of regularization of unauthorised constructions which have already

come up in Periphery should also be examined by this Committee;

(iii) that on the basis of the recommendations made by the Committee the State

Government shall take a decision whether or not to regularize such constructions;

(iv) that the State Government shall also examine the reasons for the coming up of

unauthorized constructions, rationale for their regularizing and steps to stop such construction

in future including imposition of exemplary fine and setting up of Special Courts to deal with

such illegal constructions;

(v) to fix responsibility of the officers/employees responsible for abetting such

constructions and setting up a Tribunal headed by a retired Judge of the High Court to deal

with the cases of illegal constructions.

2.3 Further, in Civil Writ Petition No. 7187 of 2003 the Hon�ble Punjab and Haryana

High Court has also sought the views of the State of Punjab about extending the abadi deh

area/lal lakir of the villages in Periphery, and this issue was also referred to the Committee.

3. THE DELIBERATIONS � BROAD POLICY FRAMEWORK

3.1 The Committee held numerous meetings and also formally obtained the comments of

relevant Departments of the Government such as Revenue, Industries, Housing and Urban

Development and Local Government. Views of the public at large were also sought through

placement of advertisements in news papers to which there was considerable response.

3.2 At the outset the Committee observed that it was first necessary to take into account

the changing character of the city of Chandigarh. It was seen in this context that the city was

initially conceived as the capital of post partition Punjab and its planning by and large

reflected the needs thereof. Over time, however, Chandigarh is not only the administrative

capital of two State Governments and a Union Territory but also an important commercial

and institutional hub which houses the regional offices of Companies and Institutions catering

to several States in the northern region. It has also become an important investment

destination for Indian and multinational Companies. The changed character of the city has put

considerable pressure on housing and social infrastructure, which was not initially catered

for. There is also increased need for connectivity and the provision of civic amenities. A

special mention needs to be made of a large population of the city, which is unable to afford

housing on account of its very high cost and has gravitated into the villages in the immediate

vicinity of the city as well as several unplanned and unauthorized new colonies. It is in this

backdrop that a fresh look has to be taken of the regulatory framework that governs the areas

immediately surrounding the city of Chandigarh so that the future needs of the city can be

adequately catered for in a planned manner.

3.3 It is also necessary to take note of the fact that even with all difficulties being faced,

Chandigarh is still one of the more liveable cities in the northern region. With its close

proximity and easy connectivity to the national capital, it has also become an attractive

investment destination. It would, in the view of the Committee, not be realistic for any State
Government not to take advantage of this opportunity and leverage its proximity to

Chandigarh to its best economic interest. Thus, industrial promotion in the vicinity of

Chandigarh has also to be envisaged and provided for.

3.4 In the light of the issues brought out in the foregoing paragraphs, the broad policy

framework within which the Committee approached the entire issue of controlling the

periphery of Chandigarh are enumerated below:-

a) Housing for the increasing population of the city is perhaps the most urgent

requirement that has to be provided for. In that context, a realistic view has to be

taken of existing unauthorized structures. Policy also needs to cater for the normal

growth of village populations as well as migration from outside specially of persons

from economically weaker sections.

b) It is necessary also to take into account the increased attraction of the city and

its environment as in investment destination.

c) Catering for further growth would involve heavy investment in road

connectivity, provision of civic amenities, electricity, water supply and sewerage.

Accordingly, it was considered desirable that the overall policy framework should

also generate adequate resources for the provision of such facilities. A

multidisciplinary sub group was asked to advise on the imposition of such charges

after studying the existing pattern in neighbouring State of Haryana.

d) The Committee noted the wide disparity between the level of civic and urban

infrastructure in the city and its surrounding towns and villages. Accordingly, the

available resources needed to be suitably deployed to ensure balanced growth. Such

resources, it was felt, could also be raised and credited towards a dedicated fund
 which could be used for developing and upgrading basic infrastructure in the

periphery area and specially for the settlements therein.

4. RECOMMENDATIONS

Given the above approach and considering the ground realities, existing status of the

Periphery, emerging problems of unregulated and unauthorised development, need for

promoting planned development and eliminating unauthorised and illegal constructions, the

Committee, proposes to address various issues on the following lines:-

(a) Periphery Controlled Area Plan

In order to meet the emerging needs of population growth, promote planned and

systematic development of the entire area and to check haphazard, unregulated and

unplanned development, the Committee suggests the preparation of a comprehensive Land

Use Plan for the entire Periphery Controlled Area. Such a broad land use plan could provide

for urbanisable zones, industrial parks, institutional and residential areas where such

development could be taken up while also highlighting the trunk services and infrastructure

to support such development. It should also highlight the sub-areas which need to be

preserved and conserved in order to effectively protect the quality of environment and

ecology in the Periphery. However, until such a Plan becomes final in statutory terms, change

of land use may be permitted as in interim measure, by the State Government in accordance

with other specific recommendations of this Committee. This plan needs to be put in place in

the shortest possible time frame as that would then provide the framework for future growth

based on well established principles of town and area planning. To implement a plan of this

magnitude, it would be advisable to consider setting up of an independent Statutory Authority

with a dedicated initial corpus and full administrative, financial and planning autonomy.
(b) Housing Schemes in the Periphery

With only limited planned urban areas available in the cities of Chandigarh, SAS
Nagar and Panchkula and the growing demand for housing, it was noted that those who could
not afford shelter in these urban areas, found place on the fringes of the city, usually in the
adjoining settlements/villages, inside or outside the Abadi areas in an unauthorized manner.
Considering the above situation, it is proposed that suitable pockets for Housing/Residential
use in the Periphery area be earmarked which can be developed by the Private parties or
Government/Semi-Government Agencies. While permitting such development, it must be
ensured that adequate provisions are made for public utilities/facilities and services. Special
care must be taken to ensure that housing needs of the economically weaker sections are
catered for in adequate measure. Detailed policy prescriptions in this respect are at Annexure
�A�.

(c) Unauthorized Constructions

The Hon�ble High Court in its orders in CWP No. 14357 of 2002 had tasked the
Committee to examine the issue of regularization of unauthorized constructions and also
desired it to examine the need to set up a Tribunal to deal with cases of illegal constructions,
besides suggesting imposition of exemplary fines to stop such constructions in future. The
issue relating to unauthorized constructions were discussed in detail. In the absence of any
detailed formal survey, a broad figure of about 1500 constructions was estimated based on
the number of notices issued by PUDA�s Regulatory Wing since 8.12.1998, the date till
which all the previous constructions had been regularized. With a view to preventing large-
scale demolitions and consequential human problems, the Committee recommends a strictly
one time regularisation of unauthorised constructions, adopting, however, a well defined and
selective approach restricting it only to small/medium residential and petty commercial
constructions.

The Committee recommends that such regularization, with a cut-off date should
involve the imposition of reasonable composition fees and land-use conversion �charges�
on a pre-defined scale, which may be pegged at a lower rates for smaller plots. Large
residential units could be considered for regularisation in accordance with the policy
proposed for farmhouses. Alternatively, such units could be regularized on imposition of
substantively higher composition fee. No regularization would be allowed in any case where
the construction interferes with the provision of trunk infrastructure. However, no such
regularization should be permitted in areas prohibited for development by virtue of being
covered under the Indian Forest Act, 1927, the Forest Conservation Act, 1980 or the Punjab
Land Preservation Act, 1900 or in areas where construction is not permitted under any other
law. To avoid any misuse of such regularisation, the committee proposes to fix the cut off
date with slight retrospective effect like 1st November, 2005.

The Committee feels that the problem of unauthorized constructions needs to be

addressed by constant and effective vigil, for which the field officers like Sub Divisional
Magistrates and their staff besides PUDA officers need to be fully involved and held
accountable. Clear administrative guidelines need to be put in place bringing out the staff
who is to be responsible for detecting illegal construction, taking legal action and enforcing
the same. Statutory powers of the Deputy Commissioner under the Periphery Act to carry out
demolitions could also be delegated to designated officers (e.g. SDMs). A dedicated field
enforcement machinery within PUDA or in the Department of Town and Country Planning
also needs to be created so that the demolition orders are implemented in letter and spirit and,
more importantly, mushrooming of illegal constructions is nipped in the bud. Suitable
amendments in the Act may also be made to vest the Deputy Commissioners with statutory
powers to issue injunctions against unauthorized construction, in addition to the existing
powers to demolish such constructions. It is further suggested that the Act be amended so as
to provide a fine which may extend up to Rs.50,000/- instead of Rs.5,000/- presently and in
case of continued violation, with a fine of Rs.5,000/- per day instead of the present rate of
Rs.500/-. Regular monitoring of progress in respect of tackling unauthorized construction
cannot be overemphasised. It is felt that at least a quarterly review needs to be undertaken at
Government level.

The Committee is of the view that in case the proposals in the above paragraph
are operationalized, there may not be any necessity to set up the Special Tribunal to deal with
cases of unauthorized construction. However, the credibility of a sustained campaign in this
respect would depend critically on the fairness of the process. Towards that end, the setting
up of an Ombudsman could be thought of who would oversee the entire process, entertain
complaints from citizens and is empowered to give directions to the concerned authorities.
The Ombudsman would have to be vested with suitable powers but care needs, at the same
time, to ensure that there is no intervention in matter relating to the hearing of cases and the
execution of orders passed by the Competent Authority.

(d) Institutions

Considering the fact that Chandigarh and SAS Nagar are emerging as fast-developing

nodes, it is natural that institutions with larger land requirements would tend to get located

here. In addition, the area is becoming ripe for establishing sports, recreation, leisure and

tourism-related activities. The Committee feels that such institutions and activities, which

have requirement of large open/vacant land area but smaller built-up area, can be considered

for location within the entire Periphery. Accordingly, it would be appropriate to consider the

option of locating such activities within the Periphery, subject to detailed guidelines, land and

development norms being put in place, which are brought out in the detailed guidelines

placed at Annexure-B.

(e) Free Enterprise Zone

(i) Free Enterprise Zone:

 The area declared as Free Enterprise Zone (FEZ) near Dera Bassi should

continue to be used for industries, although institutions could also be permitted in

accordance with the prescribed guidelines. In order to ensure rational development

and provision of basic infrastructure and services in the area, a broad developmental

framework needs to be prepared along with a development plan indicating roads/trunk

infrastructure, including areas reserved for residential and institutional needs. There

shall be no conversion/betterment charge for the new industrial units coming up in the

FEZ. However, these shall be liable to pay the External Development Charges.

(ii) Industrial

Industrial Parks may also be permitted as �mega projects� in areas

earmarked as industrial & residential for such uses respectively within the Outline

Master Plan area of SAS Nagar (Mohali).

The Empowered Committee on Mega Projects has already permitted

integrated mixed use Industrial Parks, where at least 60% of the land is used for

industry, free of external development charges and change of land use charges in the

periphery. This is a major policy incentive for making land available to industry at

reasonable rates. In the Committee�s opinion such a policy may continue in respect

of the industrial sectors in the Mohali sectoral grid and FEZ for general industry and

for areas planned in Mohali�s Master Plan for IT Industry. The policy on grant of

additional incentives to industry would, however, need to be periodically reviewed

with a view to the continuation of such benefits.

(f) Municipal Towns in Periphery

 Committee recommends that the existing towns of Kharar, Banur, Zirakpur,

Dera Bassi should continue to provide avenues for future growth and development by

ensuring adequate supply of developed land for residential, commercial, institutional

and industrial purposes. Master Plans of these Towns need to be prepared under the

Punjab Regional and Town Planning & Development Act, 1995, within the overall

ambit of the Controlled Area Plan. Further expansion in the municipal limit of these

towns has also to be regulated so that it conforms to the overall Development Plan for

the Periphery Area. It is proposed that the future expansion of municipal limits of the

existing Periphery towns should be frozen, until these Master Plans have been finally

notified. Thereafter, if need arises, such expansion can be considered, strictly in

accordance with the approved Master Plan subject, of course, to the payment of the

conversion charges as are being proposed in the report. New Municipal Councils or

Nagar Panchayats within the Periphery should be notified only after the overall

Development Plan has been put in place.

(g) Existing Rural Settlements

Considering the existing as well as future development needs of the villages

falling within the Periphery as well as with a view to cater to their increasing

population, it would be prudent to provide a sufficiently compact and contiguous belt

of land around the village �phirni� for ensuring the organic growth of these

villages. Any area falling between the �lal lakir� and the �phirni� of the village

shall also be treated as a part of the extended belt. The area should be allowed to be

used primarily for meeting individual residential and petty commercial needs of the

existing and future population of a village. However, charges for change of land use

should be levied on prescribed rates, except in the case of bonafide residents. No

industry should be permitted in such area. Similarly, formal colonization shall also

not be permitted in the extended �abadi� area on the pretext of this

recommendation alone.

With these caveats, the Committee proposes to allow the village

�Abadi� area extension by 60%, subject to a minimum of 50 metres and maximum

of 100 metres in radial length from the �phirni�. However, where the exiting Abadi

Deh or a part thereof is an area which forms a part of the rural/agriculture and

afforestation zone of the Outline Master Plan/Draft Comprehensive Master

Plan/Comprehensive Master Plan prepared under the Punjab Regional and Town

Planning & Development Act, 1995, the extent of such area shall be limited to 50

metres. Permitting construction in the notified forest areas falling in these villages

would, of course, be subject to due approval as regards change of land use. No

permission should, however, be granted in any area which falls within the sectoral

grid of SAS Nagar (Mohali), as reflected in the Outline Master Plan. The extent of

area where such constructions are to be permitted will be demarcated and certified

for each village falling within the Periphery by the Revenue Authorities, subject to the

final approval of PUDA. In order to promote planned development, it is proposed that

construction in the area should be regulated by a set of simple building norms,

subject to payment of Land-Use conversion charges and in accordance with other

details as contained in Annexure-C. However, to avoid hardship to villagers and

land owners, the area in the extended abadi deh shall be exempted from the

provisions of the Punjab Apartment and Property Regulation Act, 1995.

(h) Farmhouses
 With a view to encouraging low-density development and to meet the basic residential

demand of landowners in the area, Farmhouses were permitted as far back as 1966.

However, they could come up only beyond the 8-kilometre belt, in cases where land holding

was more than 5 acres. Keeping in view the high land values, it would be appropriate that the

norms for Farmhouses are liberalised, with the area requirements brought down to 2.5 acres

and construction being permitted within the 8 kilometre belt as well. However, the

construction of Farmhouses should be regulated by guidelines as per Annexure-B.

(i) Land-use Conversion Charge � Periphery Development Fund

As has been earlier observed, any optimal development of the Periphery has

necessarily to be accompanied by considerable state-led investment in urban

infrastructure. Similarly, the existing urban and rural settlements must also become

beneficiaries in any resource-raising that might be leveraged through a system of

granting land-use change permissions. It would be neither fair nor just to burden the

State exchequer alone with the responsibility of funding such development works,

without any concomitant additional resource mobilization. On the other hand,

ignoring this aspect at the policy formulation stage would result in irretrievably losing

the best opportunity for providing supporting infrastructure at optimal cost.

In view of this, the Committee suggests that conversion of land use and

betterment charge should be imposed if need be through an amendment of the

Periphery Act. The Committee recommends that there should be an in-built

betterment charge applicable to lands abutting the road network within the conversion

charge itself. This is fully justifiable because of the initial investment by the

Government in the form of land acquisition and construction of National / State

highways, Sector roads and other roads. Betterment charge could be in the form of a
percentage premium over and above the conversion charge. These �charges�

should be credited to the Government treasury and should be dedicated to the

provisions and maintenance of physical infrastructure in the periphery. The

Department of Housing and Urban Development in consultation with the Finance

Department, may work out the administrative and legal details to manage this Fund.

However, the model adopted by the State Government for regular release of Social

Security pensions may serve as a useful prototype to ensure that receipts on account

of this charge are released in the ordinary course of business to the nodal agency. The

Governing Body of this Fund should be a high level body, headed preferably by the

Chief Minister, and in addition to Ministers and the Administrative Secretaries

concerned, may also have representation of the elected representatives like MLAs,

Presidents of the Municipal Bodies and Panches/Sarpanches whose territorial

jurisdiction falls within the Periphery. While the Governing Body would, no doubt, be

in the best position to settle competing demands for resources, it is suggested that the

first charge on this Fund should be the basic development works in the village from

which revenue receipts arise. The imposition of a fair and optimal level of conversion

charge is crucial to the success of this policy package which must be adequate to

generate enough funds to finance creation of new roads and other physical and social

infrastructure in the periphery area.

The multidisciplinary group has worked out the details of External

Development Charges based on basic infrastructure requirements (Annexure D-II)

which need to be put in place to provide facilities broadly comparable to Chandigarh.

The scale of conversion charge is similar to the one being levied by Haryana

Government in the satellite town of Panchkula. The Committee generally agrees with

the scale of these charges including the licence fee proposed by the sub group
 (Annexure D-I) as it provides a reasonable competitive edge to Mohali compared to

the charges being levied in Panchkula (Annexure D-III). It is also worth mentioning

that while suggesting the different charges, the differential between the permissible

FARs between Mohali and Panchkula has been duly taken care of.

These charges are proposed for the outline Master Plan of Mohali and can be

suitably adjusted for remaining areas of the Periphery. Such charges would, however,

not be imposed when land is provided for public utilities and other services such as

Government Schools, Dispensaries, Veterinary Centres, Post Offices, Police Stations

and the like. The aforesaid conversion charges and other fees should be in addition to,

and not in substitution of, the External Development Charges (EDC) that are payable

within the framework of the Punjab Apartment and Property Regulation Act, 1995.

(j) Total Repeal of the Periphery Act Not Recommended:

The Committee has received suggestions from different quarters to totally repeal the

Periphery Act. In this context, attention is drawn to the changing character of the city of

Chandigarh, alluded to in paragraph 3.2 of this report. This transition also necessitates a fresh

look at the regulatory framework governing the Periphery. However, the Committee, even

after due deliberation, is unable to recommend the total repeal of the Act, as it would remove

all curbs on sub optimal construction and haphazard urban development in the Periphery.

The Committee noted that the process of drawing up Master Plans in the State as a

whole has yet to effectively take off and towards that end, the State Government is

contemplating to amend the Town and Country Planning Act with a view to permitting quick

finalization of such Plans. However, it will be several years before Master Plans would be in

place and till then, it is necessary to have a legal framework effective in the Periphery of
Chandigarh, which is currently provided by this Act. It would, therefore, be inadvisable to

remove the legal umbrella, which is available to exercise control over land use till such time

as detailed planning is put in place. The Committee has also separately suggested the

imposition of EDC and conversion charges in reasonable measure with a view to generating

resources for providing requisite infrastructure for urbanization which will and is inevitably

taking place. It would not be possible to levy such charges if there is no umbrella legislation,

which provides for it and in the absence of the levy of such charges planned growth in the

Periphery area would not be possible. For all these reasons, the Committee is of the view that

it would be inadvisable to repeal The Punjab New Capital (Periphery) Control Act, 1952.

7. CONCLUSION:

The Committee had to balance and optimise between divergent and often

conflicting demands and requirements. For instance, the purist view of freezing the

Periphery as agricultural was contradictory to the very reasonable demand to allow

for the expansion of the �abadi dehs� or for permitting housing in a planned

manner. Similarly, although institutions and leisure facilities have been

recommended, the norms of FAR and built-up area, have been pegged on the lower

side.

Conversion charges were also deemed necessary to raise resources for the

overall development of the Periphery, although the Committee was acutely

conscious that it may add to overall project cost. While the Committee recommends

strict compliance with the up-to-date Outline Master Plan of SAS Nagar, it also

suggests the speedy formulation of an over-arching Periphery Development Plan for

the entire region. Nevertheless, pending finalization of the latter, the Committee
recommends that limited change of land use may be permitted as per the

recommendations contained in this Report.

Even though existing constructions have been proposed to be regularised on

purely humanitarian grounds, the Committee has strongly recommended a zero

tolerance enforcement and regulatory regime, in the post-Policy phase. However,

enforcement of the regulatory regime would only be sustainable in the long run if

total Area Planning of the Periphery is taken up in right earnest and brought to its

logical conclusion at the earliest.

The prescription proposed by the Committee is to be viewed as a

comprehensive package, which needs to be comprehensively implemented. The

Committee sincerely hopes that it would have addressed the concerns of all the

stakeholders in a judicious, balanced and practical manner. It is now for the State

Government to consider, approve and implement both the regulatory and

development aspects of this policy in prescribed time frames.

Chief Administrator, PUDA Secretary, Housing & Urban Dev.

(Member Secretary) (Member)

Secretary, PWD (B&R) Principal Secretary, Industries

(Member) (Member)

Principal Secretary, Local Govt. Financial Commissioner, Revenue

(Member) (Member)

Chief Secretary
(Chairman)
 ANNEXURE-A

GUIDELINES FOR PERMITTING PLANNED AND ORGANIZED RESIDENTIAL

DEVELOPMENT IN THE PERIPHERY.

Planned residential development shall be permitted in the Periphery only in:

(a) The area delineated as �residential� in the Outline Master Plan/Draft

Comprehensive Master Plan/Comprehensive Master Plan, prepared

under the Punjab Regional Town Planning and Development Act,

1995, subject to a minimum area of 100 acres;

(b) The area beyond 10 kilometres of the Chandigarh boundary, as a

completely self contained and integrated residential townships, subject

to a minimum area of 500 acres. Such townships shall provide

independent access from the highways, make sufficient provision for

water supply and sewage disposal, provide adequate housing for

weaker sections and will have adequate social infrastructure in terms of

educational, medical and recreational facilities;

(c) The Municipal and Nagar Panchayat towns, as a �mega project� or

otherwise, subject to compliance with the Master Plan, or any draft

master Plan, of the town.

However, no such permission shall be granted in:-

i. The area notified for land acquisition for any public purpose; or
 ii. Area notified under the Indian Forest Act, 1927 or the Forest

Conservation Act, 1980 and under Section 4 and 5 of the Punjab Land

Preservation Act, 1900 or any other law which prohibits such activity.

Provided the land shall be in the shape of a single compact unit held in single joint or

corporate ownership.

2. �Residential� development may include:-

(a) Normal plotted development; or

(b) High-rise apartments and Group Housing; or

(c) Commercial development, within the maximum stipulated norms in an

approved residential township, or in the mixed land use zone.

3. The developer shall obtain a regular licence from the Competent Authority

under the Punjab Apartment and Property Regulation Act, 1995. External

Development Charges (EDC), Conversion Charges and Licence Fee shall be

payable as per the approved/notified rates, unless specifically exempted by the

Competent Authority. The recommendations of the Committee are at Annexure-D.

4. Development Norms

a) The prescribed development norms under the PUDA Building Rules,

1996 including all statutory and town planning norms, under the Punjab

Apartment and Property Regulation Act, 1995 shall apply.

b) Compliance with the Master Plans, including any notified draft Master

Plan would also be necessary.

 ANNEXURE-B

GUIDELINES FOR PERMITTING INSTITUTIONS, RECREATIONAL ACTIVITIES

(INCLUDING SPORTS) AND FARMHOUSES.

1. Subject to the other conditions mentioned hereinafter, setting up of

Farmhouses, institutions, infrastructure relating to recreational and leisure activities,

including sports shall be permitted in the Periphery Controlled Area, except in the:-

(a) Area covered by the Outline Master Plan/Draft Comprehensive Master

Plan/Comprehensive Master Plan, prepared under the Punjab Regional
Town Planning and Development Act, 1995, unless the prescribed
land-use is compatible with the use in question; or

(b) Area notified for compulsory land acquisition for any public purpose; or

(c) Area notified under the Indian Forest Act, 1927 or the Forest
Conservation Act, 1980 and under sections 4 and 5 of the Punjab Land
Preservation Act, 1900, or under any other law which prohibits such
activity.

2. The institutions to be permitted would generally be associated with

education, including medical education, research, art and culture. Sports

infrastructure could be confined to recognized games and sporting activities,

whereas recreation and leisure infrastructure may include amusement parks, open-

air theatres, theme parks etc. but not shopping malls, cinema halls, multiplexes and

the like.

3. The minimum area required for any of these activities would be as described

in the chart at the end of this Annexure. However, if at any stage, the total area of

site falls below the stipulated limit, the permission granted shall automatically lapse

and building, if any, constructed shall be deemed to be illegal and unauthorized.

4. Land shall be in the shape of a single compact unit, held in single or joint

ownership of natural or artificial juridical persons, or combination thereof.

5. The institutional and recreational sites shall have an independent access

from a public road having a minimum width of 40 feet. In case of sites not abutting a

public road, a connecting passage of not less than 40 feet width (which would be

used as public thoroughfare) shall be mandatory. If access is required to be taken

from a National/State Highway, it shall be taken through a service lane to be

developed at the expense of the applicant. However, in case of Farmhouses, an

independent access from a revenue �rasta� or public road shall suffice.

6. The building shall have a minimum setback of 200 feet from the National/

State Highway and at least 100 feet from any other metalled road. The minimum

setback on other sides shall be equivalent to the height of the building.

7. No sub-division of the land would be subsequently permitted.

8. Adequate provision for parking shall be made within the site.

9. Minimum Area and Development Norms

Building Minimum Floor- Ground No. of Height Hard

Type size Area Coverage stories (feet) Surface

(acres) Ratio (%age) (%age)

(FAR)

Farm 2.5 4% 2% 2 Single (18) 10%

Houses Double(28)

Institutions 5[1] 30% 15% 3 38 30%

Recreational 10[2] 5% 3% 2 28 10%

activities

Sports 10 2% 1% 2 28 5%

activities

[1]
Or the minimum statutory or regulatory norm, whichever is higher.

2 Except for Golf, where the prescribed norms shall apply.

ANNEXURE-C

GUIDELINES FOR PERMITTING CONSTRUCTIONS AROUND ABADI AREA OF

VILLAGES

Construction around �phirni� shall be permitted, subject to the

following conditions:

(i) A strip of 11 feet around the �phirni� will be treated as a �no

building zone� and no construction, including a boundary wall, shall

be permitted therein.

(ii) All radial roads emanating from the village will be extended upto the

area permitted for construction. A strip of 11 feet on both sides such

extended radial roads shall also be treated as a �no building zone�

and no construction, including a boundary wall, shall be permitted

therein.
 (iii) The buildings permitted shall be governed by the PUDA (Building)

Rules, 1996. However, these rules may have to be amended to cater

specifically for the requirements of rural areas.

Annexure � D I

Proposed Charges per gross acre of land to be charged from Developers in

Mohali.

Sr. Ty Reside Residen Commer Industri Recreati Instituti

pe ntial tial cial al onal onal
No of (Plotted (Group
Ca ) Housin
te g)
go
ry
Abuttin Abuttin Abutting Abuttin Abuttin Abuttin
g on g on on g on g on g on
N S O N S O N SH/ O N S O N S Ot N S Ot
H H/ th H H th H Sect th H H/ th H H/ he H H/ he
er / er or er S er S r S r
R S R Roa R e R e R e
S
 e o e o d o ct o ct oa ct R
ct a ct a a or a or d or oa
or d or d d R d R R d
R R o o o
o o a a a
a a d d d
d d
1. ED 1 1 1 60 6 6 6 60.3 6 3 3 3 15 1 15 15 1 15
C 5. 5. 5. .3 0. 0. 0. 6 0. 0. 0. 0. .0 5. .0 .0 5. .0
0 0 0 6 3 3 3 3 1 1 1 9 0 9 9 0 9
9 9 9 6 6 6 6 8 8 8 9 9
(FA
*( *( *(
(F R *( *( *( *(
F F F
A (F (F (F 1.50 (F F *( F F *( F
A A A
R A A A ) A A F A A F A
R R R
1. R R R R R A R R A R
1. 1. 1.
50 1. 1. 1. 1. 1. R 1. 1. R 1.
0 0 0
) 5 5 5 5 00 1. 00 00 1. 00
0) 0) 0)
0) 0) 0) 0) ) 0 ) ) 0 )
0) 0)

2. Con 6. 5. 4. 9. 7. 6. 4 40.0 3 6. 5. 4. 6. 5. 4. 6. 5. 4.
vers 0 0 0 00 5 0 8. 0 2. 0 0 0 00 0 00 00 0 00
ion 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0
Cha
rges

3. Lice 2. 2. 2. 4. 4. 4. 1 150. 1 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0.
nce 0 0 0 00 0 0 5 00 5 5 .5 5 50 5 50 50 5 50
Fee 0 0 0 0 0 0. (FA 0. 0 0 0 0 0
0 R 0
(F *( *( *( *(
0 1.50 0
A (F (F *( *( *( F *( F F *( F
(F ) (F
R A A F F F A F A A F A
A A
1. R R A A A R A R R A R
R R
50 1. 1. R R R 1. R 1. 1. R 1.
1. 1.
) 5 5 1. 1. 1. 00 1. 00 00 1. 00
5 5
0) 0) 0 0 0 ) 0 ) ) 0 )
0) 0)
0) 0) 0) 0) 0)

TOT 23. 22. 21. 73 71. 70.3 258 250.3 242 36. 35. 34. 21 2 19 21 2 19
AL 09 09 09 .3 86 6 .36 6 .36 68 68 68 .5 0. .5 .5 0. .5
6 9 5 9 9 5 9
9 9

Rs.Rs.1 Rs.5
1485 454/ 173/
Per Rs. Rs. Rs. Rs Rs. Rs. Rs Rs. Rs. R R R R R R
/- -
Sq. 477 456 436 .1 533 500 .75 73 71 s. s. s. s. s. s.
Yd. /- /- /- 51 8/ 7/ 8/ 7/- 7/- 44 4 40 44 4 40
6/ 6/ 2 5/ 6/ 2 5/
5 5

Note:
1. These rates are liable to increase on compound basis.
2. *Rates for EDC and Licence Fee increase proportionately for
higher FAR.
3. 25% of External Development Charges (EDC) shall be payable
upfront and balance 75% in 6 equated bi-annual instalments with
10% compound interest. Penal interest for delayed payment at the
rate of 18% per annum shall also be charged.
 4.. The charges have been proposed by keeping Sector (250 acres approx.)

as a unit of development.

5. For mixed land use, proportionate charges for different

categories

shall apply.
 ANNEXURE- D II

External Development Charges for SAS Nagar as per

Master plan prepared by CTP, Pb.

Sr.No. Particulars Area/Length/No. Estimated cost

(Rs. in crores)
1. Master roads
(a) R-1, R-2, R-3 130 KM 369.00
(b) High level road bridges 6 No. 24.00
(c) Fly overs 6 No. 150.00
(d) Rail over Bridge, Rail under 7 No. 14.00
Bridge
2. Master Horticulture

(a) Road Side Plantation 130 KM 3.00

(b) Dev. of Parks 1473.11 acre 25.00
3. Master Electrical

(a) H.T. lines 2023.42 acre

770.00
(b) Street lights 130.00
(c) Electrical grid sub station 400.00
4. Master P.H. Services

(a) Sullage sewer 2023.42 acre 150.00

(b) Water Supply 2023.42 acre 200.00
(c) Water works and supply from 23.90 acre 200.00
Kajauli
(d) Sewerage Treatment Plant, 70.00 acre 50.00
Disposal channel & laying
Estate Irrigation System
5. Master Storm water disposal

(a) Storm drainage 2023.42 acre 170.00

(b) Flood control - 50.00
(c) Rain harvesting structures - 50.00
6. Master Public facilities
(a) Sports Complex 90.00
(b) Police Station 60.00
(c) Educational Buildings 220.00
(d) Govt. Health centres 45.00
(e) Govt. Hospitals 275.00
(f) Fire Stations 45.00
(g) Community Center 65.00
(h) Recreational facilities 55.00
(i) Bus Terminus 70.00
(j) Solid Waste Disposal 75.00
3755.00
7. Infrastructural utilities land 4873 @ 0.41 Crore per
cost Acre
2000.00
5755.00
8. Escalation as per inflation rate 262.85
@ 7% on Rs. 3755 lacs
9. Unforseen @ 5% on Rs. 200.89
4017.85 lacs
10. Project management charges 421.87
@ 10% on Rs. 4218.74 lacs
11. Capitalised maintenance for 10 years

(a) Road Works 100.00

(b) Running & maintenance for 188.00
electrical work
(c) Running & maintenance of 500.00
P.H. works
(d) Maintenance for horticulture 30.00
works
Grand Total: 7458.61
Say: 7460 Crores

Total Area 28987.21 Acre

Say 29000 Acre

Cost per gross Acre = Rs. 25.72 lacs

Note:
1. The costs have been worked out on normative basis.

2. Mass Rapid Transit System cost amounting to Rs. 3450 crores approx. has not been
added at this stage.

3. Land cost component will be as per actual cost of acquisition including any subsequent
enhancements allowed by Courts.
Area as per proposed Master Plan of SAS Nagar

(A) Saleable Area (in acres):

a) Plotted 10200

b) Group Housing 3000

C) Commercial 1431

d) Industrial 5314

e) Institutional 1159

f) Mixed Land Use 2710

g) Railway Line/

Truck Terminus 300

24114

(B) Infrastructural utilities Land Area (in acres):

a) Roads 2023.42

b) Recreational 1243.11

c) Sewerage Treatment Plant 70.00

d) Water Treatment Plant 23.90

e) Bus Terminus 68.00

f) Golf Course 230.00

f) Hospital 55.78

h) Institutional 1159.00

4873.21
Grand Total (A + B) 28987.21 Acres

Say: 29000 Acres

Annexure �
D III

Approximate Charges adopted in Haryana for one acre of land in High-I

Potential Zone (Panchkula)

S Typ Residenti Residenti Commerci Industrial Recreati Institutio

r. e of al al (Group al onal nal
Cate (Plotted) Housing)
gory
N
o
Abutting Abutting Abutting Abutting Abuttin Abutting
 on on on on g on on
N SR Ot NH SR Ot NH SR/ Oth NH SR Oth N S Ot N SR Ot
H / he / he Se er / er H R/ h H / he
Se r Se r ctor Ro Se Ro S er Se r
cto Ro cto Ro Ro ad cto ad ec R cto
r ad r ad ad r tor o r
Ro
Ro Ro Ro R a Ro
ad
ad ad ad oa d ad
d
1 EDC 1 1 1 78 7 7 78 78 78 43 43 43 N N N 1 1 1
. 8. 8. 8. .4 8. 8. .4 .4 .4 .2 .2 .2 A A A 8. 8. 8.
8 8 8 6 4 4 6 6 6 3* 3* 3* 8 8 8
4 4 4 6 6 (F (F (F 4 4 4
A A A
R R R
1. 1. 1.
25 25 25
) ) )
2 Con 6. 4. 4. 6. 4. 4. 48 40 32 0. 0. 0. 0 0. 0 4. 3. 2.
. versi 0 8 0 07 8 0 .5 .4 .3 49 49 49 . 4 . 0 2 4
on 7 6 5 6 5 6 7 8 4 9 4 5 4 3
Char 9 9
ges
3 Lice 4. 4. 4. 5. 5. 5. 20 20 20 0. 0. 0. N N N N N N
. nce 0 0 0 00 0 0 0. 0. 0. 50 50 50 A A A A A A
Fee 0 0 0 0 0 00 00 00
(F (F (F
A A A
R R R
1. 1. 1.
75 75 75
) ) )
4 Serv 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0. 0.
. ice 4 4 4 40 4 4 40 40 40 40 40 40 . 4 . 4 4 4
Char 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 4 0 0 0
ges 0 0
(Fun
d
used
for
enfo
rcem
ent
purp
ose)
5 Scru 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0. 0.
. tiny 4 4 4 40 4 4 40 40 40 40 40 40 . 4 . 4 4 4
Fee 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 4 0 0 0
to 0 0
exa
mine
colo
ny
plan
 s/
docu
ment
s
etc.
29.7 28.5 27.6 90. 89.1 327. 319. 311.6 45.0 45.0 45.0
1 0 9 33 2 88.31 82 73 4 2 2 2
Total: (Rs. (Rs. (Rs. (Rs. (Rs.2 (Rs. (Rs.7 (Rs.7 (Rs. (Rs. (Rs.
734/ 704/ 684/ 223 202/- (Rs.2 8100 900/- 700/- 1112 1112 1112
- per - - per 2/- 182/- /- per per / / /
sq. per sq. per per p sq. per sq.mtr per per per
mtr.) sq. mtr.) sq. sq. er mtr.) sq. .) sq. sq. sq.
mtr.) mtr. mtr.) sq.mt mtr.) mtr.) mtr.) mtr.)
) r.)

Note:

1) Annual increase @ of 10% per annum in the case of Panchkula

2) NA stands for Not available.

3) Rate with FAR 0.75 and 2.50 is Rs. 25.94 lac and Rs. 86.47 lac respectively.

Petition Posted By: hindtodaynews on:12/16/2010 10:19:11 AM

Ajay Jagga,
Advocate
736, Sector 22-A

Pb & Haryana High

Court
Chandigarh 160022

Former Coumnist Hindustan Times

Chandigarh

16th December 2010

H.E. Sh. Shivraj Patil Ji,

Hon’ble Administrator,

Chandigarh Administration

Sh. Pradip Mehra, IAS

Adviser to Administrator

Subject: Periphery area, adjoining Sukhna Lake, of Chandigarh is in

danger

Respectfully submitted,

That the representationist is a practicing advocate in the Hon’ble Punjab and

Haryana High Court as well as the other foras, has been brought up in

Chandigarh, is a public spirited person and in fact has actively participated in the

betterment of the status of the city and its residents through various

representations filed before the Chandigarh Administration & PILs filed before the

Hon’ble High Court of Punjab & Haryana and at other various platforms.

Representationist was shocked and disturbed to see the newspaper report so

published in the local newspaper ‘the Tribune’ on 15.12.2010 wherein it was

dilated that neighbouring state ie State of Haryana has decided to go in for

“planned disaster” right next to the regulator end of the Sukhna Lake. Copy of the

news report is annexed herewith, for your instant reference.

The report further states that the officials in the Town and Country Planning

Department maintain that they would not allow vertical development near the lake.

However this statement is very damaging for the city’s original character, because

stating that they would not allow vertical development means they are allowing

horizontal development. The report further reveals that DLF has reportedly bought

104 acres of land, Bhoomi Greens, too, has bought the required 100 acres of land

to get a licence for developing a residential colony.

Hence it has to be taken very seriously as the intentions are clear that they are

going to violate the periphery laws, infact these projects will be in violation of the

New Punjab Periphery Control Act, 1952.

The buying of land by these real estate companies is an alarming sign because these

land deals are certainly going to violate periphery laws. The working of these real estate

companies is clear now ie buy land on GPA from landowners, float a society or have

partnership with an existing society and then proceed for licence for development in this

area.

That there is a serious threat which the city of Chandigarh would face i.e. on the

issue of Environment. The same would also be a threat of the Catchment of

Sukhna Lake. The entire area is ecological sensitive area. The likelihood planned

disaster/development, adjoining Sukhna Lake, in the State of Haryana to the city’s

north fall in the catchment of Chandigarh’s precious Sukhna lake. Soil erosion is

already a serious problem in the Shivaliks, which resulted in heavy siltation of

Chandigarh’s much loved Sukhna lake. However, the planned developments

around the already water starved lake’s catchment area would pose a long term

threat to Chandigarh’s precious lake.

Further these developments are a great threat to the wildlife sanctuary and the

environment as a whole.

In its order dated 4.12.2006 in the matter of Goa Foundation Vs the Union of

India, the Supreme Court had directed the Ministry of Environment and Forests to

refer even cases where environmental clearance had already been granted to

projects falling with a 10 kms radious of National parks and Wildlife sanctuaries to

the Standing Committee of the National Board of Wildlife(Chaired by the Prime

Minister) under Section 5(b) and 5(c) of the Wildlife(Protection) Act. The Supreme

Court has also recommended that a zone of 10 kms around National Parks and

Wildlife Sanctuaries be declared as ‘ Eco-sensitive Zones’ by all States. These

requirements are likely to be overlooked while approving the plan for the area next

to Sukhna Lake (falling in the State of Haryana).

Still further it is submitted that there is going to be an increase in pollution due to

vehicular traffic, discharge omission and other polluting elements. Further there will

be extreme pressure on the natural resources like water and man made resources

like electricity, transport etc.

Still further it is submitted none of these aspects will be considered by the State of

Haryana while granting permission for the projects in offing.

That further it is submitted that there is likelihood of the huge construction in the

area, adjoining Sukhna Lake, falling in the state of Haryana and the same will be

in complete violation of the Punjab New Capital (Periphery)_ Controlled Act 1952.
A perusal of the said act would reveal that the Act was promulgated with the

intention of controlling and regulating the Periphery Chandigarh. A perusal of the

various provisions of the Act would reveal that the basic object of the Act was to

check and prevent hap-hazard growth in and around the city of Chandigarh. It was

for this purpose that the Act was applicable for the distance of 10 miles around the

city of Chandigarh. In the instant case, this Act is likely to be completely violated in

as much as the whole object of the Act has been eroded.

Permissions are likely to be granted on the periphery area, as mentioned above, of

Chandigarh without proper process and due application of mind. The projects are

still in premature stages and if the construction starts, it will be in violation of the

Act of 1952.

That there is another very important issue in the entire matter. The city of

Chandigarh has already applied to UNESCO for declaration of the city as a World

Heritage City. Chandigarh Administration has already given an undertaking to

UNESCO that it would not change urban core of Le-Corbusier plan which would

retain the authenticity of the urban planning. A further undertaking has been given

that there has been no change in the architecture plan of the city of Chandigarh.

This application of the Union Territory Chandigarh , to the knowledge of

representationist, is pending adjudication with the UNESCO which would be a

matter of pride and honour not only for the city of Chandigarh but for India if

Chandigarh is declared as a heritage of city which is already a MECA for

architecture and foreigners who throng the Sukhna Lake Area. By grant of heritage

status, further impetus would be incused which would result in not only status and

pride of India taking a rise which would also give a tourism in the country.
However, if any construction is permitted on the area (known as regulator end)

falling in the State of Haryana, the application of the Union Territory Chandigarh is

liable to be rejected. In fact the Public Interst Litigation being CWP No. 13178 of

2010 is already pending adjudication before the Hon’ble Court on the Heritage

issue.

In view of the above mentioned scenario, it is expected and prayed that the

Chandigarh Administration should keenly intervene in the matter, on its own or

through Ministry of Home Affairs (which is incharge of Chandigarh) and ensure that

no construction come up in the periphery area of Chandigarh, falling in the State of

Haryana, especially adjoining or next to Sukhna Lake. I further expect and pray

that Chandigarh Administration will take action to ensure that no necessary

sanction/approval /permission is granted by the State of Haryana for execution of

any construction, in violation of the Punjab New Capital (Periphery) Control Act,

1952 and the rules made thereinunder and also against the very edict of the city of

Chandigarh as conceptualized by Le-Corbusier and in serious violation of the

Sukhna Choe to which the area in question is a reservoir/catchment area. It is

further prayed that the Chandigarh Administration should intervene and ensure to

maintain/preserve the said area as vacant natural land as conceptualized by the

founder architects of the city of Chandigarh i.e Mon Le-Corbusier and as dreamt by

Late Pandit Jawahar Lal Nehru, otherwise it will be too late as the virus, of

disturbing the original character of city first hit Punjab and now Haryana, is

spreading fast.

Thanking you.
 Yours truly,

Ajay Jagga, Advocate

THE PUNJAB NEW CAPITAL (PERIPHERY) CONTROL ACT, 1952

This Act came into force when the city of Chandigarh was in the process being
developed as a capital of Punjab. It was foreseen that the city will require more land for
its future growth and , therefore, this Act was brought into force to prevent unregulated
and haphazard growth around the city.

The Punjab Government have declared a belt of 16 kms around the Union Territory
of Chandigarh as controlled area under section 3 of this Act. The controlled area has
certain restrictions on change of land use and erection or reerection of structures. It is
not permissible to any person to change the land use or to raise structure in
contravention of these restrictions.

1. Illegal marriage palaces, farmhouses mushroom in Chandigarh periphery

As reported by Nitin Jain in expressindia.com on 07 July 2010:

Illegal marriage palaces, farmhouses mushroom in Chandigarh periphery - Express India

Illegal marriage palaces, farmhouses mushroom

in Chandigarh periphery
Mohali Illegal marriage palaces and farmhouses are thriving in Chandigarh’s periphery. At least 26
marriage palaces and 35 farmhouses in different parts of Greater Mohali area are operating despite
being identified as illegal and demolition orders issued against them. Thanks to official inaction.
Ever since the Greater Mohali Area Development Authority (GMADA) came into being in August 2006,
none of these illegal structure has been razed since many bigwigs, including top politicians and
bureaucrats, have benami stakes in the lucrative business.

Official information procured under the RTI Act from GMADA revealed demolition orders were issued
against three illegal marriage palaces and 12 farmhouses, criminal complaints were lodged against six
marriage palaces while 23 farmhouses were issued showcause notices under Sections 5 and 11(1) of
the Periphery Act.
 While eight illegal marriage palaces and resorts have sought regularisation, three such establishments
have been exempted from any action following the reports by field staff that two of them existed
before 2005 while another had already procured no objection certificate (NOC) from authorities.

The applications seeking regularisation of Celebration Garden (Mullanpur), Palki and Shagun
Marriage Palace (Balongi), Mankin Resort (Daon), Sandhu Palace (Peer Sohana), S S Farm and
Banquet (Chapparchiri), Paradise Sereenz Banquets (Chapparchiri), Rai Banquet Hall and Farm
(Kailon), SD Farm Marriage Palace (Landran), and Hotel Amar Resort-cum-Restaurant Marriage
Palace (Padiala) are still under consideration at the government level while Chashme Shahi Resort
(Barmajra) was found constructed before December 1998 and Maiestic Green Marriage Palace
(Jhanjeri) was reported to be existing before November 2005.

The regularisation was sought under a special offer made by the state government in September
2008, wherein applications were invited from structures violating the Punjab Urban Planning and
Development Authority (PUDA) Building Rules outside the municipal limits across the state.

According to the policy, the Change of Land Use (CLU) charges, External Development Charges (EDC)
and license fee will be recovered, as applicable and levied, for regularisation.

The case of another controversial resort, Forest Hill, a golf and country club, in Karoran village, is
pending before the Supreme Court for alleged encroachment on forest area and memberships to
certain executive and judicial top brass.

According to the previous directive of the state government issued on October 15, 1966, the
minimum area required to develop a farmhouse was five acres but the New Periphery Policy, notified
on January 20, 2006, reduced this minimum area requirement to 2.5 acres. The farmhouse owners
are required to procure CLU, for which requisite fee is applicable.

According to the provisions of the Punjab New Capital (Periphery) Control Act, 1952, any construction
within the periphery control area requires CLU.

OFFICIALSPEAK

“We are in the process of pulling down illegal structures. While police help was sought for
demolishing of certain establishments, criminal proceedings were underway against others.
Action against those seeking regularisation was on hold till the government takes any decision,”
GMADA additional chief administrator Balwinder Singh Multani.

 CHANDIGARH SKYLINE IN DANGER

A TRIBUNE INVESTIGATION

Jairam Ramesh orders green probe into Tata’s Camelot

Asks Badal, Shivraj Patil to expedite process to declare area around Sukhna sanctuary an eco-sensitive
zone

Ruchika M. Khanna
CHANDIGARH: UT's first chief architect MN Sharma has alleged violation of Periphery
Control Act, 1952, in the periphery of the city, which poses a threat to the original character
of Chandigarh.

He has expressed hope that the attempt by Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) to revive the
coordination committee for the tricity, with secretary, ministry of urban development, as its
chairman, would help stop blatant regularization of unauthorized structures in areas like
Kansal.

Addressing a joint press conference, Sharma said the issue had been brought to the notice of
the administration but to no avail.

He said he had pointed out the chaotic development and unplanned growth in the periphery to
Madhukar Gupta, secretary, Ministry of Home Affairs, in a letter sent on Monday. Letters
written by Swiss-French architect Le Corbusier on the issue had been attached for reference.

There is very little land left for future growth and it is considered prudent that all major
projects at hand be evaluated and go through scrutiny of high-level technical experts. Crucial
challenges confront the city such as suitable public mass transportation system, removal of
slums, balanced employment opportunities and incomplete projects, read the letter.

"In a meeting with UPA chairperson Sonia Gandhi, a delegation of city residents had
proposed setting up of the Urban Arts Commission, which has been unduly delayed. The
matter needs to be pursued," it added.

Sharma further said, "Corbusier, in his note on April 27, 1964, on certain town-planning
problems being faced in Chandigarh, had defined the objective for acquisition of additional
land for Chandigarh's periphery."

A periphery of 10 miles around the city has also been created for agrarian functions of
poultry-farming, dairy-farming and agriculture. "The functions of the city and the periphery
must not be interchanged, otherwise confusion and anarchy are sure to follow," Corbusier had
written.

UT administration had, in 1998, engaged EFN Ribero and associate town-planner to prepare
the report of Chandigarh Interstate Metropolitan Region. The fate of the proposals submitted
by the consultant is not known, Sharma alleged.

Sharma added that when Corbusier had put up stiff resistance to setting up of a cantonment 5
kilometre from Sukhna Lake, massive unplanned construction so close to the city should
never have been allowed.

Goswami added that projects were being finalized in the name of tourism even though
Chandigarh did not have exact data on actual number of tourists coming to the city and their
profiles.

Read more: 'Periphery control act being violated' - The Times of India
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/chandigarh/Periphery-control-act-being-
violated/articleshow/4605918.cms#ixzz1BAUSptPb
 Architect M N Sharma on why Chandigarh's
beauty is becoming history

Le Corbusier Foundation, Paris, plans to put

Chandigarh in UNESCO's modern heritage list.
m n sharma, the first architect to work with Le
Corbusier, tells savvy soumya misra about an
urbanization drive and other problems killing
the city

Unplanned growth Chandigarh is among the

best planned cities in the world. It had a specific
plan for periphery areas, green belts and
expansion. The city was planned for half a million but we are over a million today, and this
excludes the population of the periphery towns of Mohali, Panchkula and other unauthorized
townships which are completely dependent on the city's infrastructure. The administration
while trying to bring the facilities of a big metro is actually spoiling the beauty of the city.

Builder-friendly rules The Building Regulations, 1966, and Periphery Act, 1952, were made
to ensure that Chandigarh grew systematically. These have been amended several times to
suit builders. In December 2001, Apartment Rules were framed and the developers took
advantage of it. Amendments in the act allowed residents to convert their bungalows into
three-storey apartments. Under the Periphery Act, those residing in the periphery could not
use the land for any other purpose other than agriculture; poultry and orchards for example.
But now, the government is flouting rules by acquiring land in periphery areas. A Rajiv
Gandhi Chandigarh Technology Park has been planned behind the Sukhna lake, classified a
periphery area. According to the original master plan, which is now missing (the state
administration has lost the original master plan drawn by Le Corbusier. The current plan has
been drawn up by town planners), the land around Sukhna Choe and Patiala ki Rao, were to
remain green belts. But the administration is using such areas for "development projects'.

New projects The Rs 800-crore film city project was proposed after officials saw a film city
in Bangkok. There is no guarantee of its success. The government has no back-up plan for it.
A similar project, Dara Studio in Mohali, failed and is being used as a venue for weddings
instead.

There is no need for a medicity either. Chandigarh has a well-established health facility. A
medicity should come up in Panchkula and Mohali, or, Shimla. The administration is leaving
no stones unturned to make the most of the opportunity. Such projects will only deprive
farmers of their livelihood and further affect the green belt, which are allowed for agricultural
purposes only.

There are plans to set up a vegetable terminal market as well. There are already many
vegetable markets in the city and they are all conveniently accessible. The state
administration is setting up an Industrial Area Phase iii project, despite the failure of the first
phase.
It declared the first phase as a failed project and has sanctioned construction of multiplexes
and shopping malls there. Some industries were declared sick and some were asked to
convert to commercial purposes or move out elsewhere.

Mono rail and metro Chandigarh doesn't need either. It doesn't have highrises; besides, such
projects will spoil the look of the city. Chandigarh has always been a bicycle township and
residents prefer walking tracks and bicycle tracks to mono rail or the metro.

Sukhna lake The lake is endangered. The government is busy investing in other projects
instead of reviving the Sukhna. Siltation is a growing concern (see ‘Silt diet', Down To Earth,
November 30, 2007).

Greening Chandigarh Action Plan Around 5,000 mango trees were cut to clear roads for a
six-lane highway to the it park. Mango orchards have been cut to make multi-level parking
space for malls coming up at the industrial area site. And now the state has a Greening
Chandigarh Action Plan. It is ridiculous if their idea of greening means replacing fully grown
trees with saplings. The state claims that the tree cover has increased by 4 per cent. How is
that possible if the land area hasn't increased over the years?

Corrective measures We had approached United Progressive Alliance chairperson Sonia

Gandhi in July 2006. We suggested the formation of a statutory regulatory body to retain the
special character of the city and for orderly growth of the region. She had assured immediate
action. Though the matter rests with the centre, it is unfortunate that the state is going ahead
with the projects. The administration should think beyond money. Senior architects and town
planners should be consulted. People's participation is also a must.

Date: 30/12/2007

Source: Down to Earth Vol: 16 Issue: 20071231

Font Size -A +A

40 yrs, ‘liberal’ govt: Periphery changed

Vikas Kahol
Posted: Thursday , February 26, 2004

Kashmir has never been integral part of India: ArundhatiMusharraf fit to be killed, says fatwaBrit Indian dentist
guilty of offering patient discount in exchange for sexAI crash victims' families decry 'demeaning' Canadian
compensation offerA blast and a conspiracyDivorce pleas cite gay relations more frequently than ever

Chandigarh IF the periphery has been violated, the government has had a major part to play in it. In the last four
decades — from 1962, when the extent of the periphery was increased to 16 km — the city’s boundary has been
blatantly defiled. The government’s recent move to extend the limits of lal dora by 7 to 10 km has only
encouraged the mess. But let’s start at the beginning:

1952
A five-mile belt was declared as periphery. Ten years down the line, keeping in view rapid urbanisation,
construction of HMT and cantonment at Chandimandir, the extent of Periphery Zone was increased to 10 miles
(16 km).

The Periphery Act permitted erection and re-erection of any building, making or extending any excavation, but
with the prior approval of the Deputy Commissioner. However, the power to change the use of land was vested
with the government.

The Act granted exemption to activities including construction of houses and buildings subservient to agriculture
within abadi areas and erection of place of worship existing at the time when the Act came into force.

1966
The state government permitted some additional activities within the periphery. These included farmhouse
beyond five miles of the city, with the minimum area of 5 acres and with the built-up area ranging from 1,500 to
2500 sq ft. Residential houses within the extended abadi area, cattle sheds with minimum land holdings of three
acres, dairy farms beyond five miles, wells, tube-wells for those having more than two acres of land were also
allowed.

Post-1966
The reorganisation scenario witnessed some more changes in the periphery. After 1966, the city and the
periphery got separated with the periphery area being divided into three administrative units. Punjab got the
maximum area (72 per cent), Haryana got 24 pc and Chandigarh, 4 pc. The periphery witnessed largescale
development of new urban areas in the shape of SAS Nagar, Panchkula and Mansa Devi. The towns in the
periphery also witnessed rapid growth which triggered largescale unauthorised and illegal sub-division of land.

1990
In all 4,892 hectare land falling in 23 villages in Patiala district was declared Free Enterprise Zone (Dera Bassi)
where industries could be set up without the requirement of change of land use.

This followed a major decision of the government to regularise all unauthorised constructions up to December 9,
1998. It was decided to set up Notified Areas Committee (NAC) at Zirakpur.

Further decision to regularise unauthorised constructions was also taken and cut-off date for this was November
3, 2001. At this point, the Punjab and Haryana High Court stepped in and put a stay on the decision.

December 7, 1998
A high-level meeting was held under the chairmanship of Punjab CM. It was decided to allow development in
Ecologically Fragile Zone (EFZ), north of Secretariat Complex and also allow leisure activities, including
amusement parks and farmhouses in periphery.

This came as the biggest blow to the Punjab New Capitol Periphery Control Act, 1952.

‘It is not benami’

‘‘I OWN four acres of land in village Kansal. These are not benami nor are these in the names of my ‘near and
dear ones’, as stated in the news report VIPs take lead in UT’s village roadshow. All the four acres are held in my
name,’’ says S S Brar, former finance secretary of Chandigarh now posted in Delhi. He says he bought this land
‘‘several years ago and through duly registered sale deeds made in the office of the sub-registrar and were
purchased after paying proper stamp duty’’.

Brar adds that in accordance with the Conduct Rules, the state government was duly informed. ‘‘Having been a
former finance secretary of the UT, I am fully aware of the Chandigarh Periphery Control Act and Rules.
Therefore, this land is being put only to agricultural use,’’ he says. There is no farmhouse, only a small thatched
gardener’s hut, he adds.

Forest zones gone

SOME of the villages that have seen uninterrupted construction activity fall completely in the forest zones. Among
these are villages Karoran, Nada, Parch and Sunk, as indicated in annexures to the draft policy regarding
permitting construction in the Chandigarh periphery controlled area falling under Punjab.
Farmhouses
IN 1998, the Punjab government permitted development in Ecologically Fragile Zone (EFZ). But some conditions
were laid. It was decided that farmhouse should have at least four acres of land, and ground coverage should not
exceed four per cent of it. Also, only single-storey construction was allowed.

For non-EFZ, the minimum land requirement was four acres, maximum allowed ground coverage was 2 per cent
and two-storey construction was allowed, besides permission for more than one dwelling unit.

Font Size -A +A

Periphery road sign: Change or be doomed

Vikram Jit Singh
Posted: Tuesday , April 29, 2003

Print Email To Editor

Most Read Articles

Kashmir has never been integral part of India: ArundhatiMusharraf fit to be killed, says fatwaBrit Indian dentist
guilty of offering patient discount in exchange for sexAI crash victims' families decry 'demeaning' Canadian
compensation offerA blast and a conspiracyDivorce pleas cite gay relations more frequently than ever

Chandigarh AS change beckons a steady transformation of City Beautiful, just outside its boundaries, it literally
threatens. The genetic purity of Le Corbusier’s grand plan for an ordered and regulated periphery, radiating 16
km from the city boundaries, has been violated. As teeming lakhs strike roots on the architect’s plans,
Chandigarh wakes up to the need for a way out of the mess, which once was a sprawling wilderness — a virtual
sanctuary for partridges, pea fowl, wild boar, sambhar and more.

Talk about a solution today and at two extremes stand Punjab Deputy Speaker Bir Devinder Singh and former
chief architect M N Sharma. Bir Devinder, with his calibrated touch for public concern, is emphatic that ‘‘people
must be liberated from the Punjab Periphery Control Act so that they can live their lives with dignity and not
denied basic facilities like power, water connections’’.

Sharma, who articulates Corbusier’s dream, however, calls for ‘‘a PIL — judicial intervention that will restore to
supremacy the Periphery Act...’’ The haphazard constructions, he insists ‘‘must go. It’s complete anarchy out
there.’’

The magnitude of the human problem in the periphery dictates a truth that no administrator can run away from:
laws must be modified. To what extent, time and study will show. But for Chandigarh, the message is real: Either
change now or anarchy and change in the periphery will become overwhelming in the coming decades.
Former finance minister Capt Kanwaljit Singh suggests, ‘‘Have a Master Plan for the periphery. Involve private
initiative for its development and infrastructure.’’ Go in for vertical planning to accommodate the population rise,
he says adding, ‘‘Mega cities are no solution: they take decades and cost hundreds of crores.’’

Administrators of both the neighbouring states of Haryana and Punjab realise that demolition of the
‘‘unauthorised constructions’’ is next to impossible, given the sheer mass of humanity involved. Regularising what
has been built till now and ensuring planned growth for the future seems to be the only answer.

‘‘We cannot freeze development,’’ says a senior Haryana Town Planner. ‘‘We must go in for planned
development. For example, set up rural development boards with a short perspective of, say five years, and not
long-term plans of 20 years,’’ he adds.

PUDA Chief Administrator D P Reddy promises a policy ‘‘in the next 10-15 days’’ that envisages a solution to the
periphery problem and also talks about regularising unauthorised construction. ‘‘We are going to discuss the
proposal with the CM soon,’’ says Reddy.

Now, how valid is a law (Periphery Act) for a land that is owned by people? Says S S Bhatti, former principal,
Chandigarh College of Architecture: ‘‘We must involve the people who own land. Let the administration float a
proposal by consulting architects, sociologists, industrialists, land-owners et al.’’ This, he adds, would ‘‘help us
formulate a development plan in a democratic manner. Chandigarh’s green belt could be preserved by acquiring
land for it.’’

But will Chandigarh’s great architectural originality be lost in the ‘planned development’ of the periphery, just as
the junked plans for ‘New Chandigarh’ and ‘Anandgarh’ once threatened? Says Jasvir Singh Dhaliwal, a
landowner in the periphery and one who spearheaded the Anandgarh Hatao Sanjhi Sangarhsh Committee as its
general secretary: ‘‘We must preserve Chandigarh’s beauty along with the ecological balance. In my tours across
the periphery, I realise that the lal dora must be increased but in a planned manner.’’ The solution, says Dhaliwal,
‘‘lies in building rural enclaves with a stress on fruit cultivation that this area is conducive to and which also fits in
with Chandigarh’s green profile.’’ Also, towns like Ropar, Morinda and Kurali could be developed and linked with
Chandigarh by superfast highways so that people could work in Chandigarh and live in these towns, he suggests.
‘‘But we should not develop Kharar too much for it would pose the danger of merging with Chandigarh and
turning the region into one big unmanageable urban sprawl. Chandigarh would then,’’ he fears, ‘‘be choked.’’

Capt Kanwaljit is clear that any development must be consistent with infrastructure, growth and that private
developers must be encouraged. ‘‘Why must the government get so deeply into real estate?’’ he asks. ‘‘Let
private developers make money and let government tax them,’’ he suggests.

Bir Devinder, who chaired the Committee on Subordinate Legislation of the Punjab Assembly that reccomended
repeal of the Periphery Act, adds: ‘‘The burden of the Act has fallen on the villagers. The lal lakir has not been
extended for 50-100 years.’’

The committee, he says, summoned representatives of the government, who also agreed that the Act must be
repealed. ‘‘The government will have to comply within three months on

the recommendations of thecommittee,’’ says Bir Devinder.