Strategy for fighting against unjustified EDC demand

[MANOJTOMAR]

Rajan Ji,

.what is the year of granting licenses to ur colony by DGTCP.

A- 2007

the rate of EEDC/EDC as per the circular stayed are for 2010.Was there some seperate order /circular of HUDA/DGTCP in which the rates of 2010 was extrapolated up ward and /or downward taking the rates fixed as on 1/1/2010 as base .

A- RTI reply by DGTCP shows the rates for 2007 are 2042 lakhs/acre for EDC
and 41.78 lakhs/acre for EEDC.
I think the 10 % increment or decrement formula is the part of policy. The calculations done two times for a colony. First for tentative EDC and then for final/enhanced EDC.

We have paid all the initial EDC as per agreement to builder. Now it is a different point that builder has not deposited it to TCP or deposited only a partial amount.
As far as enhanced EDC is concerned we have not deposited single rupee.

Actually we want to fight against builder wherein he takes edc from buyer and do not deposit it to tcp.
the tcp goes on imposing the interest for default in payments. The builder feels it is his right to pass this interest on us. The tcp not acting and taking shelter under supreme court judgement that they cannot say anything on buyer seller agreement.

we approach court with above mentioned background.

but our petition was rejected by court saying the matter is against a private party i.e ansal
and no writ can be filed. court said civil suite is to filed at civil court.

we again filed the petition
but builder was not party this time.

only three parties...tcp, huda, principal secretary.

thanks

[MANOJTOMAR]

Dear friends,
After the stay on enhanced EDC by Hon Punjab and Haryana High Court,
Many people have started debates about the refund of EEDC from their respective builders.
Please correct your understanding and try to understand the present petition and its aim.

PETETION DOES NOT ASK FOR

1. The Government of Haryana or HUDA or whosoever,
To start expending the collected EDC.
In other words, DOES NOT ASKS FOR the start of “external development”.
2. Relief from the corrupt practices of builder-
Over charging of EDC, adding interest on EDC for the default on the part of colonizers/builders, non-transparency in the EDC calculations etc.

PETETION AIM-
1. STOP THE CONTINUOUS EXPLOITATION in the name of EDC

PETETION ASK FOR-
1. Quashing of Enhanced EDC Memo
2. Collect EDC according to 1975 ACT.

“The delegated authority must act strictly within the parameters of the authority delegated to it under the Act and it will not be proper to bring the theory of implied intend or the concept of incidental and ancillary power in the matter of exercise of fiscal power.”--------Supreme Court of India

Thanks

Manoj

[dheerajjain]

Manoj Bhai, yes, that is the intent of your petition and GFWA petition too to quash enhanced EDC. Reason why members in Faridabad are debating about refunds is that most of members have already paid enhanced EDC to their respective builders.

[rgajra]

Dear friends,
PETETION ASK FOR-
1. Quashing of Enhanced EDC Memo
2. Collect EDC according to 1975 ACT.

Dear Manoj,

Is the petition you and others have filed seeking this (quashing of EEDC memo & collection of EDC according to 1975 Act) with prospective effect (from the future date of court order if the case is decided in your favour) or with retrospective effect (from the date of the EEDC memo, and in which case the collected EEDC will need to be refunded)?

Is the petition clear on this or have you left it to the judge/s to decide the appropriate thing to do? If it is the latter, then what can really the judge/s do? Can the judge/s quash the Memo just prospectively leaving all those who have already paid EEDC in the lurch (although I wonder how they will be able justify this)?

Wishing you and your fellow co-petitioners my bright wishes at a favurable outcome to the petition.

Regards
Rajesh Gajra

[naveenarichwal]

But the petition asks to "QUASH THE ENHANCED EDC MEMO" and this act was done in past.

[rajan]

To the best of my understanding.
the circular being stayed shows the rates finalised by HUDA/DTCP,in 2009.2010 etc after they woke up from sleep of last 8 to 10 years.How much they are correct is any bodies guss?.One little thing i noticed in the calculation of Faridabad 2009 ,that after adding all what they can ,they have also added 49% as the admin & prise variation.

Even during this period the HUDA/DTCP were collecting the EDC/IDC from the buyers (through the builders ).
One important point is that if the HUDA/DTCP were sleeping for 10 years why we should pay for the abdication of responsibility of the HUDA/DTCP.
The second point is that if now they are revising the rates for the last 6-7 years ,what is the guaranty that after another 10 years ,the HUDA/DTCP may not again revise the rates from back dates.
and on top of this ,the associate of HUDA/DTCP, yes i am talking about builders, further increased the EEDC/IDC by adding more & more to the actual cost of EDC/IDC as being worked out by this extrapolated value.
The last point,If the licenses were given in 2005/06,why the work did not started of development by HUDA at that time (obviously the cost has doubled during this period)and why should we be asked to pay for this additional price for which the sole responsible is the the courrept HUDA/DTCP officers.
rajan

[MANOJTOMAR]

Rajesh Ji,

What would be the stand of court in future is hard to foresee now. We don't know whether or not we will win the case.
In case we win....What I think is that we will get a relief in way ----That DOES NOT take away the right of respondents to charge EDC but directs them to stop the PRESENT METHOD (quash the enhanced EDC memo) of charging EDC and Charge EDC according to the provisions of 1975 Act.
What we have at present, is a system that derives the EDC amount for a particular license, according to following variables of equation:
1. Area of the license
2. Tentative rate of EDC
3. Final rate of EDC
We challenged the variable 2 and 3 above saying this method is against the provisions of ACT 1975.
The present system in which HUDA decides the rate in the form of lakhs/acre and TCP simply do multiplications with the area of colony is against the provisions of act. In case of enhanced EDC also the TCP takes reference to HUDA CA notification wherein lakhs/acre has been revised.
The ACT has not given any power to HUDA for deciding the EDC. The director TCP has to do everything himself. The work of external development can be done by anybody L&T or HUDA or whosoever. Similarly the Director TCP can take estimate of external development works from any agency and that is his prerogative.
But when it comes to charging the EDC for a particular license, the word PROPORTIONATE enters into the picture.
The amount so derived constitutes the EDC payable for a license. You have to tell this amount before the grant of licensee. If a bank guarantee equals to 25 % of this amount has been deposited by the licensee along with the fulfillments of other terms and conditions then only the license is granted and agreement is signed.

Thanks

[berrysau]

the memo which is stayed

Thanks