Parsvnath loses licence for Sonepat housing project

CHANDIGARH: The state government has cancelled the licence of Delhi-based realty major Parsvnath Developers Limited’s (PDL) mega housing complex in the Sonepat-Kundli Multifunctional Urban Complex against the backdrop of various deficiencies in the licence-renewal application.

Pradeep Sharma

Tribune News Service

Chandigarh, February 2

The state government has cancelled the licence of Delhi-based realty major Parsvnath Developers Limited’s (PDL) mega housing complex in the Sonepat-Kundli Multifunctional Urban Complex against the backdrop of various deficiencies in the licence-renewal application.

The Department of Town and Country Planning (DTCP) granted PDL a licence to develop a residential plotted colony over 84.155 acres in Sector 8 and 19 of the urban complex on May 8, 2006. The licence was valid up to May 7, 2011.

According to the Haryana Development and Regulation of Urban Areas Act, 1975, and Haryana Development and Regulation of Urban Areas Rules, 1976, the developer was required to submit an application for renewal of the licence. Parsvnath applied for the renewal of licence on April 10, 2012, for the period of May 8, 2011, to May 7, 2013. However, the renewal application for the period of May 8, 2013 to May 7, 2015, was not submitted by the developer.

The developer’s application dated September 3, 2012, was examined by Anurag Rastogi, Director General of the DTCP, and certain shortcomings in the application were pointed out and conveyed to the builder on October 31, 2012. “An opportunity to avail the benefit of external development charges (EDC) relief policy dated April 12, 2012 by submitting 25% bank guarantee against outstanding dues was also conveyed to the builder on October 31, 2012,” an order issued by the director general said.

Since no reply to the departmental communication dated October 31, 2012, was received, an opportunity of personal hearing was accorded to the builder for February 11, 2013. Subsequently, Parsvnath submitted a written reply to the director general. In the meantime, the written reply submitted by the realtor was examined and deficiencies observed were again conveyed to it on March 15, 2013. In response, the builder again submitted a reply on March 19, 2014. However, it was reiterated by the department that the builder had failed to deposit the bank guarantee equivalent to 25% of the total outstanding amount of EDC for availing benefit of the relief policy.