Faridabad colony, set to be razed, braces for another protracted battle

FARIDABAD: Kant Enclave, a 425-acre real estate sprawl carved out in the mid-80s in Faridabad near the Asola Bhatti Wildlife Sanctuary, has reached the end of the road. The deadline set by the Supreme Court to vacate properties is here (July 31), marking the end of three tumultuous decades of legal battles during which the housing colony, whose selling point was its lush green setting with the Aravalis in its backdrop, became a symbol of real estate excesses.The Supreme Court had, in of its hearings, had described as "frightening" illegal constructions in the Aravali forest areas.

But while the legal case reaches a conclusion, it's not a closure that residents who legitimately invested in the properties at Kant Eanclave have been able to accept. They are probably the only homeowners in NCR who have their own houses but are looking for places to stay on rent, a reversal of the general order of flat owners having to wait years, paying both rent and EMI, for their homes.
The residents have also pointed out that the compensation they will receive won't buy them a new property in Delhi-NCR.
"I got the land deed registered and building plans sanctioned from the Haryana government's department of town and country planning (DTCP). I paid property tax every year. I have an official electricity connection. How can we be told our houses are illegal. Shouldn't action be taken against the state government and bureaucrats who approved construction on paper and never told us this was a forest?" asks Sanjay Basu (58), a Kant Enclave resident since 2003.
That's exactly what made this legal battle a compli-cated one. The origins of this go back to Eighties when the developer, R Kant & Co, bought land from villagers in Anangpur and got approval from DTCP to develop the housing colony and a film studio.
But a few years later, between 1988 and 1990, in view of large-scale degradation of the Aravali and Shivali hills, a government-formed committee recommended the inclusion of the area between Badkal and Surajkund lakes - which included Kant Enclave - in the ambit of the Punjab Land Preservation Act (PLPA), the law protecting the Aravali foothills from construction activity (incidentally, this year, the Haryana assembly passed a bill that lifts PLPA from areas notified under master plans, though a notification to that effect is yet to be issued).
The panel also recommended that the area should be "closed" to external activity for the purpose of afforestation. In the meantime, permission to Kant was withdrawn after the company failed to comply with terms and conditions of the approval. But in March 1992, the company signed an agreement with the Haryana government agreeing to comply with the conditions and was allowed to go ahead with construction. The Faridabad Master Plan was also prepared and Kant Enclave was demarcated as a part of Sector 40.
However, in August 1992, the state issued a notification prohibiting clearing or breaking of land in the area, recognising it as protected land under the PLPA.
After years of legal battle, which ensured Kant Enclave never really took off, the Supreme Court for residents and ordered houses in Kant Enclave built after 1992 to be demolished.
The court expressed concern over "irreversible damage" to the ecology of the Aravali hills due to construction, and said the company had been brazenly flouting the law in connivance with DTCP despite reservations of the forest department.
The court also fixed a compensation formula - it asked the developer to refund people the money they paid to buy plots with an interest of 18% per annum from the date of investment, and Rs 50 lakh to those who had built houses.
Residents, however, are questioning the Haryana government's valuation process and seeking compensation under the Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act (LARRA), 2013. Brig MB Anand VSM (retd), a veteran of the 1971 and Kargil wars, says, "We want rehabilitation in this colony as we have followed all laws in buying this land. However, if that is not done, we should be given compensation on scale of LARRA 2013 - 2.5 times the circle rate. The land was bought three decades ago at a rate of mere Rs 2,500-3,000 per square yard. Even if we get our investments back with interest, we won't be able to buy even a one-bedroom house anywhere in Delhi-NCR. The compensation is unjustifiable, considering these are the sunset years of our lives."
Robin Das Gupta, another Kant Enclave resident, adds, "The Haryana government's evaluator who visited my property spent merely 35 minutes and made an evaluation of the construction worth only Rs 46 lakh. However, when I got an evaluation done by a licensed evaluator, it turned out to be Rs 1.4 crore." Gupta, along with some other land owners, has moved the Faridabad civil court, demanding a fresh evaluation.
Residents also says they have complied with environmental rules and helped revive the ecology of the area. "Even 28 years ago, we made sure the colony had a robust rainwater harvesting system. We built 14 parks. We planted more than 12,500 trees. We acquired all environmental permissions. We have not altered the natural undulation of the hills," says Rahul Juneja.
Commenting on the compensation process, a senior DTCP official says the Supreme Court order is clear and the department has been following it.
"We have already transferred compensation to 13 land owners who provided their account details. The Supreme Court has clearly said those who are not satisfied with the compensation can move the lower court and some land owners have recently done so. They can follow the legal course of action and put forward their demands."
Arun Gupta, partner, R Kant and Co, says the government should acquire the land and pay compensation as per land acquisition laws. "We are doing everything to comply with the Supreme Court order by paying rehabilitation funds and compensation cost. But whoever bought land in the colony are in legal possession of that. No private land can be taken away without compensation. Not only plot owners, the promoter (developer) too is the victim. It is the same government that gives you the licence to build in urban areas under the master plan and later brings a notification to close it for development," Gupta says.