BPTP Parkland Plots - Electrical & STP demand

[pramodsinghal]

Dear all,

This is my first post after registering myself on this website and paying for the membership fee today. I congratulate you all for the excellent work being done here. Hopefully, I can add my voice and support to the cause. I am based in Singapore. I have a plot in Sec 85. I have been following with BPTP since last few months after I got there additional EDC, STP and Electical charges related demand. I visited their office about 10 days before and met their front desk officer. I was provided with the following documents for extra Electrical and STP charges demand. I have done my own analysis and post this information today.

Summary:

1. I couldn’t figure out anything in these which mandates BPTP to be collecting additional amount from us for Electrical charges (230 KV stn). I have created a summary in excel file and put remarks in the pdf file / highlighted in red things which I found relevant.

I note the following

a) New Guidelines for Electrical System have been issued as recent as 9/5/2011 via Memo. Ch-38/P&D-932/Vol-III and old guidelines have been Withdrawn (pages 1 to 12 in pdf)
b) SE (OP) sending Letter to Chief Engineer (OP) dt. 20/12/2010 via Memo. Ch-48/SI-1671 in which the load calculation is found ok by using the Guidelines for Electrical system which are dt. 17/7/2006 and not the latest guidelines as in (a) above. Also, talks about Memo dt. 24/6/2010 via Memo Ch-2/SE/Coml/25/2007/sol "May be got revoked", this part I am not clear. As this Memo has asked for approvals to be pending (please see (c) below)
pages 16-17 in pdf
c) Director (OP) Memo dt. 24/6/2010 via Memo Ch-2/SE/Coml/25/2007/sol is saying approval is pending till (i) Land is earmarked by the developer (ii) DHVBN says load should be higher. Page 13 in pdf.
d) Developer asking for converting from 11 (0.433KVA lines) to higher capacity and SE(OP) to CE(OP) saying it can be considered. Pages 14 and 15 in pdf.

It is not clear to me from where this 220KV substn demand has been raised on all of us as it seems that load calcualtions have been found ok using the older guidelines. I may be wrong.

2. Also, attached from Page 18 to 23 is the “Ministry of Environment Clearances” letter which they are using for STP demand. Letter only mentions that BPTP needs to provide STP however, this was known to the developer right from the grant of license and this should not be new. It doesn't talks about any capital requirments etc. I am not clear thus why they would be raising this demand only in 2011. BPTP knew they have to provide a STP right from the time they got the license or not ?

Request the senior members on the forum to provide some guidance and please take this matter further with the concerned authorities for discussion.

regards

BPTP Summary of Electrical Connection extra charhes letters with DHVBN.xls

[pramodsinghal]

Dear all,

Bhoovi provided me good instructions to put the document on google. You can access the pdf file from the link below
https://docs.google.com/file/d/0ByRNWAGbr9e5OGxzWVJSNHFWQU0/edit

Please provide your expert opinion and suggestions to take it forward.

regards,
Pramod

[rajan]

Hi friends

Plz see my views on BPTP in other thread i.e. bptp-offering-possession-of-defficient-plots-without-completing-their-obligations-t1065-15.html#p9529

RAJAN

[yadav_ajay]

Dear all @BPTP Plot Holders,

As per demand Notice of BPTP, they asked all Plot holders to pay Rs 775/- per sq yard for EC " Electric SubSation of 22KV and others.

while same is being under preparation and construction by DHBVN and HUDA.

Pls refer cutting from today's news paper.

This clearly shows that BPTP is asking demand which is already covered under EDC.

Pls send this news article to BPTP and ask them for justification.

They are not having any legal rights to ask this demand from Customers.

Source : Amar Ujala, Faridabad edition dated 14 Jun'12.

[BlessU]

Hi
Greetings

Reproducing Definition of the Apex authority providing license to a builder for developing Residential complexes

“External development works” include water supply, sewerage, drains, necessary provisions of treatment and disposal of sewage, sullage and storm water, roads, electrical works, solid waste management and disposal, slaughter houses, colleges, hospitals, stadium/sports complex, fire stations, grid sub-stations etc. and any other work which the Director may specify to be executed in the periphery of or outside colony/area for the benefit of the colony/area;

SOURCE: http://tcpharyana.gov.in/ click on Acts/Rules and search "External Development"

It is pure meekness on the part of authorities for not questioning unjustified demands despite 1000s of complaints against BPTP. Complaints to BPTP have yielded only one answer "you have signed the BBA"

Will any GFWA, BPTP Parkland Plot owner be kind enough to file an RTI with DTCP which grants the license to clarify on this definition with regards to inclusion of cost of Electrical substation, STP etc in EDC/BSP/IDC or not??

Once clarified, the illegal contents of BBA can be challanged in the court of law.. I have very little hope of getting any respite out of BPTP who has exploited its customers in the name of STP/Electrification charges after 7 years of launch, 5 years of license and 3 years after 100% payment was taken.

Cheers

[ssg.sunilgupta]

Dear All -

pl. find enclosed documents obtained through RTI on STP and electrical substation. both these communication clearly shows the miscommunication spreaded by BPTP.

regards
ssg

[rgoel24]

Dear Mr Sunil

These are wonderful piesce of information we have so far thru your RTI, very well done sir...

If possible can u send me the original RTI application filed by you so that replies can be checked accrodingly..

With Regards
Rahul Goel
09873800618

[gaurav_tpm]

Dear Members,

I have a plot in W block. I am not able to follow this group regularly. Please let me know the latest stand about STP/ Electrical charges. Is the matter taken up further or it has taken a back seat in view of EDC case....

thanks

Gaurav

[yadav_ajay]

Friends,
Greetings!

First of all, On behalf of Parklands Owners Association-Gr Faridabad we would like to extend our best wishes on the auspicious occasion of Maha shivratri.

Thanks to all our associated friends (direct or indirect), who shown confidence and extended support to us as and when required.

Stating forward, we all are victims of BPTP by one or other means and unjustice demand of BPTP.

List of illegal demands by BPTP are;

1. Extra demand of EEDC (over and above Govt. Notification)
2. Over Charging of IDC against the Govt. Notice.
3. illegal demand of STP (Swerage Treatment Plant)
4. illegal demand of ESS (220 kv Electric Sub Station)

You must be aware that BPTP, charged STP (@ RS 220/- Per Sq yard) and ESS ( @ Rs 775/- Per Sq yard), while as per RTI replies received from various Govt. offices, we come to know that STP and ESS are already part of EDC (External Development Charges) and BPTP levying double taxation on us, one in the name of EDC and other by STP, ESS.

We, at Parkland Owners Association- Gr Faridabad, continuously pursing these illegal demands with various Govt agencies from Faridabad to Chandigarh, and same time building pressure on BPTP to withdraw these demands.

Further, we are happy to inform you that under the leadership of Sh. Rajan Agarwal (President-Parklands Owners Association) and with support of all our members, our pressure started showing some positive results and;

Now, BPTP agreed upon on our claim of that ESS (220 kv electric Sub Station) is part of EDC. and Govt. is already charging the EDC from us. A communication is being received from BPTP for the same.

Moreover, we need to further take up this issue to completely withdraw the demand of 220 kv sub station and STP and would keep fight on with BPTP, till all our demands accepted/agreed upon by BPTP.

We need to put multi direction pressure on BPTP, so that there won’t be any escape for BPTP. Soon, we would be updating you on the step forward in the Law of Court for our issues.

Hope in days to come, we would take our fight a step forward and hope for the positive results.

Parklands Owners Association Greater Faridabad
Email : parklandsowners@gmail.com

[anuj020676]

Congratulatios! Ajay Yadav and Rajan Agarwal for the efforts turning in to positive results. Please keep it up continued. One day builders will start realising that buyers can not be befooled

[jatinderkumar]

Thanks to AJAY YADAV AND RAJAN AGGARWAL for the enormous amount of effort that they have given to the cause .I shall like to congratulate on the positive outcome and hope the organisation shall continue the struggle and further appeal to other plot owners to unite and support the parklands plot owners association.

[asiapole]

Congratulations to entire GFWA and Parklands plot owners association team for their leadership. This is certainly a great relief after imposition of huge burden of EEDC and ESS+STP charges. Great Work!!!

[jatinderkumar]

Hi,Friends received a letter from bptp explaining huda notification that the edc shall only cover the cost towards establishing the 220kv grid sub-station including land but the buyers shall have to bear the other charges such as infrastructure,transformers,electrical cables,feeder pillars,and many allied charges and the refund shall be calculated once they get the confirmation from the concerned authorities.

[ravindermangla]

Jatinder Kumar Ji, Could you please upload the copy of letter received from BPTP so as to have a look by all the Parkland Owners.

[RSHYAMGARG]

Sir, I have also received a letter from BPTP. From the language of letter it is clear that this Company has issued the letter due to pressure from GFWA and HUDA. Actually these Blood Pressure and Tension (Giver ) People will not give even a single paisa. They are not giving the Penality as agreed in Villa Buyers Agreement. They have taken 100% amount+ registration and conveyance deed by issuing of fake offer of possession of Villa letter in the Month of August, 2012 but till now they have not taken Occupation Certificate from HUDA. All members are requested to share their views what action should be take against this builders.