1. Action Taken Report in respect of Minutes of 1682nd meeting held on 08.12.2022 was discussed.

1. The proposal was forwarded by the South DMC (online) for consideration by the Commission.
2. The Commission approved the building plan proposal for Delhi Archives (G+5) at its meeting held on December 18, 1980.
3. The Commission did not approve the building plans proposal for the addition of a new building block (Cultural Block (2B+G+5) and Archives Block (2B+G+2) at its meeting held on June 02, 2022, specific observations were given.
4. The revised building plan proposal for the addition of a new building block (Cultural Block (2B+G+5) and Archives Block (2B+G+2)) received (online) at the formal stage was scrutinised along with the replies submitted by the architect in response to previous observations of the Commission communicated vide DUAC observation letter no: OL-27052255033 dated 08.06.2022. Based on the replies submitted and the revised submission made, the following observation is to be complied with:

a. Double stack parking provisions have been made in both the basements (basement-I&II) to achieve the requisite parking requirements. The architect/proponent shall ensure its actual execution at the site and the same shall be examined at the time of receiving the proposal at the completion stage.

b. Double stack parking provisions have also been made on the surface adjoining the front set-back which is advised to be avoided to avoid marring visual & urban aesthetics and the same shall be relocated elsewhere.

c. Sustainability features shall be as per point no. 7 of the CPAA (Criterion for Project Assessment and Approval) available on the DUAC website at www.duac.org.in.

d. All service equipment, plumbing pipes, rainwater pipes, water tanks, DG sets, DG exhaust pipes, air-conditioning units, solar panels etc. should be camouflaged appropriately (in terms of point nos. 10, 11 &12 of the CPAA (Criterion for Project Assessment and Approval) as available on the DUAC website at www.duac.org.in.

1. The proposal was forwarded by the South DMC (online) for consideration by the Commission.
2. The Commission did not approve the building plan proposal (Formal) at its meeting held on August 25, 2022, specific observations were given. And accepted the concept of the building plan proposal at its meeting held on October 27, 2022, specific observations were given.
3. The building plan proposal received (online) at the formal stage was scrutinised along with the replies submitted by the architect in response to the previous observations of the Commission communicated vide DUAC Conceptually Suitable letter no: OL-15102227046 dated 31.10.2022. Based on the replies submitted and the submission made, the following observations are to be complied with:

a. Sustainability features shall be as per point no. 7 of the CPAA (Criterion for Project Assessment and Approval) are available on the DUAC website at www.duac.org.in.

b. All water tanks, plumbing pipes, outdoor air-conditioner units, solar panels, DG Set, DG exhaust pipes etc. should be camouflaged appropriately (in terms of point nos. 10, 11 & 12 of the CPAA (Criterion for Project Assessment and Approval) are available on the DUAC website at www.duac.org.in.

1. The proposal was forwarded by the South DMC (online) for consideration by the Commission.
2. The Commission did not approve the Layout and the Building plan proposal at its meeting held on October 20, 2000. However, the building plan proposal (2B+G+5 Floors) was constructed on the site, by the proponent, on the basis of approvals given by the MCD. Later, the Commission accepted the proposal for NOC for Completion at its meeting held on August 12, 2015, specific observations were given.
3. The building plan proposal (addition of three (03) floors over the existing (2B+G+5) floors) received (online) at the formal stage was scrutinised and the following observations are to be complied with:

a. The Commission observed that the proposal is for the addition of three more floors (6^th, 7^th and 8^th floor) above on an existing built construction (2B+G+5 Floors) but the cropped and fudged photographs of the existing site development have been given which does not elucidate the site development sufficiently. Uncut clear photographs (including basements, area accommodating Gen Set, DG exhaust pipes, Chiller plant etc.) must be provided for the judicious consideration of the proposal (formal stage) better.

b. The architect has claimed a 30% reduction (under dynamic parking norms) in the requisite car parking requirements for the proposal but the distances for the nearest metro station have not been provided to substantiate this claim, the same must be provided in the appropriate medium.

c. The provisions made for the requisite parking requirements for the site are not understood clearly. The required parking requirements (existing & proposed) have been provided on the surface only which appears to be not feasible. Existing parking and parking from additional FAR (proposed) are to be shown clearly on the layout plan with a bifurcation of two.

d. All requisite parking requirements shall be as per applicable norms/regulations/guidelines etc.

e. Discrepancies have been observed in the submission received at the formal stage, double stack parking provisions have been made but the same has not been shown in the 3D views submitted which could impact the visual, urban aesthetic of the area. Similarly, the location of solar panels differs in plans and 3D views submitted. All drawings must be coordinated (plans/elevations/sections etc.) with each other.

f. The sections need to be detailed (longitudinal and cross-section across the site as well) clearly showing the architectural elements, sun shading mechanisms, plumbing details etc. The Plans and elevations for all drawings across the site shall be co-related and submitted. The elevation features in the buildings are not reflected in the plans/sections.

g. The Commission observed while considering the case for additions/alteration it did not consider and cover the existing built construction at the site. This concerns the proposal for additions/alterations only.

h. The proposal has been submitted for the addition of three more floors above the existing superstructure. A lot of live/dead load is being added to the existing building. The structure shall be designed so that it can withstand weather effects, impacts from calamities like earthquakes etc. and can withstand the additional load.

i. Sustainability features shall be as per point no. 7 of the CPAA (Criterion for Project Assessment and Approval) as available on the DUAC website at www.duac.org.in.

j. All water tanks, plumbing pipes, chiller plants, outdoor air-conditioner units, solar panels, DG Set, DG exhaust pipes etc. should be camouflaged appropriately (in terms of point nos. 10, 11 & 12 of the CPAA (Criterion for Project Assessment and Approval) as available on the DUAC website at www.duac.org.in.

4. Overall, due to insufficient information provided, the proposal could not be appreciated judiciously by the Commission.
5. The architect is advised to adhere to the above observations of the Commission and furnish a pointwise compliance & reply.

1. The proposal was forwarded by the South DMC (online) for consideration by the Commission.
2. The Commission approved the building plan proposal at its meeting held on July 07, 2022, and approved the revised building plan proposal at its meeting held on November 03, 2022, specific observations were given.
3. The revised building plans proposal (with minor modifications due to fire requirements) received (online) at the formal stage was scrutinised, the following observations are to be complied with:

a. Sustainability features shall be as per point no. 7 of the CPAA (Criterion for Project Assessment and Approval) are available on the DUAC website at www.duac.org.in.

b. All water tanks, plumbing pipes, outdoor air-conditioner units, solar panels etc. should be camouflaged appropriately (in terms of point nos. 10, 11 & 12 of the CPAA (Criterion for Project Assessment and Approval) as available on the DUAC website at www.duac.org.in.

1. The proposal was forwarded by the South DMC (online) for consideration by the Commission.
2. The Commission approved the building plan proposal (3B+LG+UG+First floor) at its meeting held on June 15, 2005, and specific observations were given. The Commission accepted the proposal for NOC for Completion at its meeting held on August 06, 2008.
3. The building plan proposal for additions/alterations (additions to an existing LG+UG+first floor, and proposed second & third floors) received (online) at the formal stage was scrutinised, the following observations are to be complied with:

a. All requisite parking requirements shall be as per applicable norms/regulations/guidelines etc.

b. Sustainability features shall be as per point no. 7 of the CPAA (Criterion for Project Assessment and Approval) as available on the DUAC website at www.duac.org.in.

c. All plumbing pipes, service equipment, outdoor air-conditioner units, solar panels, etc. should be camouflaged appropriately (in terms of point nos. 10, 11 & 12 of the CPAA (Criterion for Project Assessment and Approval) as available on the DUAC website at www.duac.org.in.

1. The proposal was forwarded by the North DMC (online) for consideration by the Commission.
2. The Commission approved the building plan proposal at its meeting held on December 24, 1986, and specific observations were given.
3. No previous record of the approval taken (NOC for Completion) has been found in the available record of the Commission.
4. The building plan proposal for additions/alterations (addition of a room, toilet and balcony in each D.U., staircase and public toilet) received (online) at the formal stage was scrutinised, the following observation is to be complied with:

a. The Commission observed that while considering the case for additions/alterations it did not consider and cover the existing built construction at the site. This concerns the proposal for additions/alterations only.

b. All encroachments/extensions/corrugated sheets etc. in the building structures shall be removed.

c. The provision of proposed parking is not clearly understood, the requisite car parking requirements appear to be not feasible. The car parking details shall be indicated in the appropriate plans and other parking details, location of no. of cars, car movement pattern, etc. Existing parking and the parking from additional FAR (proposed) are to be shown clearly on the layout plan with a bifurcation of two.

d. Inconsistencies have been noticed in the design scheme (3D views), some of the portions have been provided with an air-conditioners screening mechanism but appear to be missing in other portions. Similarly, the same is missing in elevations/sections etc. The proposal is at the formal stage and needs to submit well-coordinated drawings including elevations/sections/3D views etc.

e. The added structure shall be designed so that it withstands weather effects, impacts from calamities like earthquakes etc. as it is an additional structure added to the existing superstructure. It shall be ensured it is braced firmly to the building and does not impact the safety of the superstructure.

f. The toilet under Swachh Bharat Mission, ATM etc. is also part of the formal submission but their detailed drawings (including screening mechanism, elevations, sections, 3D views etc.) have not been submitted. The Commission observed that these components have a bearing on the overall visual, urban, and aesthetic quality of the complex. The same is to be revised appropriately and incorporated for review by the Commission.

g. Sustainability features shall be as per point no. 7 of the CPAA (Criterion for Project Assessment and Approval) as available on the DUAC website at www.duac.org.in.

h. All water tanks, plumbing pipes, outdoor air-conditioner units, solar panels etc. must be camouflaged appropriately (in terms of point nos. 10, 11 & 12 of the CPAA (Criterion for Project Assessment and Approval) as available on the DUAC website at www.duac.org.in.

5. Taking into consideration the facts enumerated above, in view of the insufficient information provided to the Commission, the proposal received at the formal stage could not be appreciated fully by the Commission.
6. The architect is advised to adhere to the above observations of the Commission and furnish a pointwise compliance & reply.

1. The proposal was forwarded by North DMC (online) for consideration by the Commission.
2. The building plan proposal received (online) at the formal stage was scrutinised and the following observations are to be complied with:

a. The semi-circular arch in the form of a sun shade provided over windows shall be straightened.

b. Provisions for bathing areas shall also be considered in the toilets.

c. Sustainability features shall be as per point no. 7 of the CPAA (Criterion for Project Assessment and Approval) are available on the DUAC website at www.duac.org.in

d. All water tanks, plumbing pipes, service equipment, outdoor air-conditioner units, solar panels etc. should be camouflaged appropriately, in terms of point nos. 10, 11 & 12 of the CPAA (Criterion for Project Assessment and Approval) as available on the DUAC website at www.duac.org.in.

1. The proposal was forwarded by the NDMC (online) for consideration by the Commission.
2. The Commission approved the building plans proposal at its meeting held on June 04, 2019, and specific observations were given. And accepted the concept of the revised building plan proposal at its meeting held on September 04, 2020.
3. The proposal for NOC for Completion received (online) at the completion stage was scrutinised along with the observations/recommendations given by the concerned local body i.e., NDMC in part ‘B’ & ‘C’ Proforma. Based on the observations/recommendations received and the submission made, the following observations are to be complied with:

a. It was observed that while forwarding the proposal to the Commission at the completion stage following observation/recommendations has been made in Performa Part-C (completion stage) by the concerned local body i.e., NDMC:

“…….observations/recommendations of the sanctioning authority while forwarding the matter to DUAC for consideration in the Performa Part-C of the Completion stage from serial no 1 to 4 indicates the following:

“…..NO..…”

The Commission considers the proposals based on the certification related to building bye-laws etc. furnished by the concerned local body. Taking into consideration the observations/recommendations made and forwarded by the concerned local body i.e., NDMC, the proposal could not be examined judiciously by the Commission.

b. The proposal has not been sufficiently documented to the extent that the photographs of the completed structure (including basements & terrace areas etc.) have not been provided sufficiently. An appropriate number of uncut photographs of the completed superstructure from all sides (including night-time photographs, basements, terraces etc.) must be provided for a better understanding of the proposal.

c. Also, approval received from DUAC (at the formal stage) shall be superimposed on the plans/elevations/sections etc., over the actual built structure on the site, existing & proposed changes done in the design from the approval (by DUAC), to understand the extents of deviations made internally as well as external changes made with respect to the sanctioned plan, if any.

d. For a better understanding of the proposal side by side photographs ‘Before (3D views submitted at the time of formal approval) and After (actual built construction photographs)’ of the constructed building blocks be provided.

4. In view of the insufficient information provided to the Commission, the proposal for NOC for the completion plan could not be appreciated fully by the Commission.
5. The architect is advised to adhere to the above observations of the Commission and furnish a pointwise incorporation/reply.

1. The proposal was forwarded by the NDMC (online) for consideration by the Commission.
2. The Commission approved the layout and the building plan proposal at its meeting held on May 30, 2015, and the revised building plan proposal was approved at the meeting of the Commission held on November 13, 2019, and specific observations were given.
3. The proposal for NOC for Completion received (online) at the completion stage was scrutinised along with the observations/recommendations given by the concerned local body i.e., NDMC in part ‘B’ & ‘C’ Proforma. Based on the observations/recommendations received and the submission made, the building plan proposal for NOC for Completion is found to be accepted.

1. The proposal was forwarded by the DDA (online) for consideration by the Commission.
2. The Commission approved the building plan proposal at its meeting held on July 05, 2017.
3. The proposal for NOC for Completion received (online) at the Completion stage was scrutinized along with the observations/recommendations given by the concerned local body i.e., DDA in parts ‘B’ & ‘C’ Proforma. Based on the observations/recommendations received and the revised submission made, the following observations are to be complied with:

a. It was observed that while forwarding the proposal to the Commission at the completion stage following observation/recommendations has been made in Performa Part-C (completion stage) by the concerned local body i.e., DDA:

“…….observations/recommendations of the sanctioning authority while forwarding the matter to DUAC for consideration in the Performa Part-C of the Completion stage from serial no 1 to 4 indicates the following:

“…..NO..…”

The Commission considers the proposals based on the certification related to building bye-laws etc. furnished by the concerned local body. Taking into consideration the observations/recommendations made and forwarded by the concerned local body i.e., DDA, the proposal could not be examined judiciously by the Commission.

b. The proposal has not been sufficiently documented to the extent that the photographs of the completed structure (for which portion NOC has been applied including gate, boundary wall, toilet under Swachh Bharat Mission, ATM, basement, terrace etc.) appear to be missing in the submission. An appropriate number of photographs of the completed superstructure (for which NOC for completion is required including gate, boundary wall, toilet under Swachh Bharat Mission, ATM, basement, terrace, night-time photographs etc.) must be provided & documented with suitable labelling/delineation and uncut/clear photographs from all sides for a better understanding of the proposal.

c. To fulfil the requisite car parking requirements of the proposal double stack parking arrangements have been shown in the second basement but the photographs of the same are missing in the submission. An appropriate number of photographs of the same are provided to substantiate its actual construction at the site for the review of the Commission.

d. An exposed DG exhaust pipe is visible in one of the outer façades (rear side) of the building, the same shall be screened appropriately so as not to mar the visual, urban aesthetics of the area.

4. In view of the insufficient information provided to the Commission, the proposal for NOC for the completion plan could not be appreciated fully by the Commission.
5. The architect is advised to adhere to the above observations of the Commission and furnish a pointwise incorporation/reply.

1. The proposal was forwarded by the DDA (online) for consideration by the Commission.
2. The Commission approved the building plan proposal at its meeting held on January 19, 2011, and accepted the proposal for NOC for Completion at its meeting held on December 19, 2012.
3. The building plan proposal additions/alterations (addition of three floors (7^th, 8^th & 9^th floors) over an existing building comprising of 2B+G+6 floors) received (online) at the formal stage were scrutinised and the following observations are to be complied with:

a. The Commission observed that while considering the case for additions/alterations it did not consider and cover the existing built construction at the site. This concerns the proposal for additions/alterations only.

b. Cropped photographs of the existing development have been provided which does not elucidate the existing site conditions (including built façade etc.), the same shall be provided with uncut photographs from all sides.

c. The architect has claimed to accommodate all the requisite car parking requirements of the site (current + proposed) in the existing basements itself by providing double stack parking provisions, but an appropriate number of photographs of the basements have not been provided to understand its current situation. The same shall be provided along with the car parking details including location of no. of cars, car movement pattern, etc. Existing parking and the parking from additional FAR (proposed) are to be shown clearly on the layout plan with a bifurcation of two.

d. A lot of live/dead load is being added to the existing building, the added structure shall be such designed so that it withstands weather effects, impacts from calamities like earthquakes etc. as it is an additional structure added to the existing superstructure. It shall be ensured it is braced firmly to the building and does not impact the safety of the superstructure.

e. The elements of sustainability are missing in the design scheme. These shall be identified and marked on the plans.  Roof-top utilities are not shown in the plan/ 3D views and thus require to be shown on the relevant drawings. The screening for the same shall also be mentioned and marked clearly in the plans/3D views.

f. The Sustainability features shall be as per point no. 7 of the CPAA (Criterion for Project Assessment and Approval) as available on the DUAC website at www.duac.org.in.

g. All water tanks, plumbing pipes, service equipment, outdoor air-conditioner units, solar panels, DG Sets, DG exhaust pipes etc. should be camouflaged appropriately (in terms of point nos. 10, 11 & 12 of the CPAA (Criterion for Project Assessment and Approval) as available on the DUAC website at www.duac.org.in.

4. In view of the insufficient information provided to the Commission, the proposal for additions/alterations could not be appreciated fully by the Commission.
5. The architect is advised to adhere to the above observations of the Commission and furnish a pointwise incorporation/reply.

1. The proposal was forwarded by the CPWD (online) for consideration by the Commission.
2. The Commission approved the building plan proposal at its meeting held on May 26, 2022, and specific observations were given.
3. The revised building plan proposal received (online) at the formal stage was scrutinised and the following observations are to be complied with:

a. A single ramp has been provided for ingress and outgress of the vehicle to the basement which is proposed to be divided by a solid median, instead soft pylons are suggested for making divisions.

b. Double Stack parking provisions have been shown in the basement (B-2) to achieve the requisite parking requirements. The architect/proponent shall ensure its actual execution at the site and the same shall be examined at the time of receiving the proposal at the completion stage.

c. Sustainability features shall be as per point no. 7 of the CPAA (Criterion for Project Assessment and Approval) as available on the DUAC website at www.duac.org.in.

d. All service equipment, water tanks, air-conditioner units, DG sets, DG exhaust pipes, solar panels, plumbing pipes etc. should be camouflaged appropriately in terms of point nos. 10, 11 & 12 of the CPAA (Criterion for Project Assessment and Approval) as available on the DUAC website at www.duac.org.in.

1. The proposal was forwarded by the DDA (online) for consideration by the Commission.
2. The Commission accepted the NOC for Completion at its meeting held on November 14, 2002, and approved the proposal for additions/alterations at its meeting held on May 07, 2018, specific observations were given.
3. The Commission did not approve the building plans proposal for additions/alterations at its meeting held on December 08, 2022, specific observations were given.
4. The revised building plans proposal for additions/alterations received (online) at the formal stage was scrutinised along with the previous observations of the Commission communicated vide DUAC Observation letter no: OL-30112222071 dated 14.12.2022. Based on the revised submission made, the following observations are to be complied with:

a. The Commission observed that while not approving the proposal at its meeting held on December 08, 2022, very detailed & specific observations were communicated vide DUAC observation letter no: OL-30112222071 dated 14.12.2022 unsatisfactory compliances have been made and some of which remain non-compliant.

b. From the actual site photographs provided by the architect, it was evident that the construction work on the site is in progress, which the Commission took note of.

c. The formal proposal is for extensive additions/alterations on an existing superstructure but the same has not been elucidated appropriately, accordingly, it was desired that the proposed additions shall be superimposed on the existing superstructure for a judicious understanding of the design proposal.

d. The provision of proposed parking is not clearly understood, the requisite car parking requirements appear to be not feasible. The car parking details shall be indicated in the appropriate plans and other parking details, location of no. of cars, car movement pattern, etc. Existing parking and the parking from additional FAR (proposed) are to be shown clearly on the layout plan with a bifurcation of two.

e. All requisite parking provisions must be as per applicable norms/regulations/guidelines etc.

f. The air-conditioners could be an eye-sore to the building façade thereby spoiling the visual, urban aesthetics. Innovative design provisions shall be made in the design itself to accommodate the outdoor air-conditioner units, and it shall be ensured that the pipes are appropriately screened so that they are not exposed on the outer façade and mar the aesthetics.

g. All temporary coverings/extensions must be removed.

h. The Commission observed that while considering the case for additions/alterations it did not consider and cover the existing built construction at the site. This concerns the proposal for additions/alterations only.

i. The added structure shall be designed so that it withstands weather effects, impacts from calamities like earthquakes etc. as it is an additional structure added to the existing superstructure. It shall be ensured it is braced firmly to the building and does not impact the safety of the superstructure.

j. All water tanks, plumbing pipes, service equipment, outdoor air-conditioner units, solar panels etc. should be camouflaged appropriately (in terms of point nos. 10, 11 & 12 of the CPAA (Criterion for Project Assessment and Approval) as available on the DUAC website at www.duac.org.in.

5. Taking into consideration the facts enumerated above, in view of the insufficient information provided to the Commission, the proposal received at the formal stage could not be appreciated fully by the Commission.
6. The architect is advised to adhere to the above observations of the Commission and furnish a pointwise compliance & reply.

1. The proposal was forwarded by the NDMC (online) for consideration by the Commission.
2. The Commission approved the building plan proposal at its meeting held on November 09, 1979, and the NOC for completion was accepted at its meeting held on July 26, 1991, and specific observations were given.

3. The Commission did not approve the layout and building plan proposal (demolition & reconstruction) at its meeting held on December 01, 2022, specific observations were given.
4. The revised layout and building plan proposal (demolition & reconstruction) received (online) at the Formal stage were scrutinized along with the replies submitted by the architect in response to previous observations of the Commission communicated vide DUAC observation letter no: OL-29112224032 dated 07.12.2022 and the comments of the concerned local body, i.e., NDMC. Based on the replies submitted, comments received from the local body and the revised submission made, the following observations are to be complied with:

a. Sustainability features shall be as per point no. 7 of the CPAA (Criterion for Project Assessment and Approval) as available on the DUAC website at www.duac.org.in.

b. All water tanks, plumbing pipes, service equipment, outdoor air-conditioner units, solar panels, DG set, DG exhaust pipes, etc. should be camouflaged appropriately (in terms of point nos. 10, 11 &12 of the CPAA (Criterion for Project Assessment and Approval) as available on the DUAC website at www.duac.org.in.

Building plan proposal for Redevelopment of Filling cum service station in respect of IBP at L-Block, Hari Nagar, Jail Road. (Conceptual Stage)

1. The proposal was forwarded directly by the architect (online) at the conceptual stage for consideration by the Commission.
2. The layout and building plan proposal received (online) at the conceptual stage was scrutinized and the following observations are to be complied with:

a. The 1.80 m ramp provided to access the sales building is creating hindrance to the functioning of the Pollution check kiosks, the same shall be relocated to the shorter edge of the sales building

b. Sustainability features shall be as per point no. 7 of the CPAA (Criterion for Project Assessment and Approval) are available on the DUAC website at www.duac.org.in.

c. All water tanks, plumbing pipes, service equipment, outdoor air-conditioner units, solar panels, DG set, DG exhaust pipes, etc. should be camouflaged appropriately (in terms of point nos. 10, 11 &12 of the CPAA (Criterion for Project Assessment and Approval) are available on the DUAC website at www.duac.org.in.

Building plan proposal (for upgradation/modification of facade and minor internal changes) in respect of Commercial building at C-2 Saket District Center. (Conceptual stage)

1. The proposal was forwarded directly by the architect (online) for consideration by the Commission.
2. The Commission accepted the concept of the building plan proposal for addition/alteration (addition of 5^th & 6^th floor above) at its meeting held on April 08, 2021, specific observations were given.
3. The revised building plan proposal (for upgradation/modification of facade and minor internal changes on 4^th, 5^th & 6^th floors) received (online) at the conceptual stage was scrutinised, the following observations are to be complied with:

a. The Commission observed that while considering the case upgradation/modification of facade and minor internal changes it did not consider and cover the existing built construction at the site. This submission concerns the proposal at conceptual level for upgradation/modification of facade and minor internal changes only.

b. The Commission took note of the fact, as claimed by the architect/proponent, that construction work on site (4^th floor) is in progress on the basis of the approval given by the DDA.

Found conceptually suitable (not limited to these observations).

‘The conceptual suitability is only with reference to the mandate of the Commission. However, it would be reassessed at the formal stage based on the 20-point criteria as available on the DUAC website.  It would not be a substitute for formal approval of the proposal referred through the concerned local body in terms of section 12 of the DUAC Act, 1973.

1. The proposal was forwarded by the South DMC (online) for consideration by the Commission.
2. The Commission approved the layout and building plan proposal (B + G + 3) in respect of 100 bedded general hospital at RHTC, Najafgarh at its meeting held on November 20, 2019, specific observations were given.
3. The Commission did not accept the NOC for completion at its meeting held on December 08, 2022, and on October 13, 2022, specific observations were given.
4. The revised proposal for NOC for Completion received (online) at the completion stage was scrutinised along with the previous observations of the Commission communicated vide DUAC observation letter no: OL-02122258042 dated 14.12.2022 and the observations/recommendations given by the concerned local body i.e., South DMC in part ‘B’ & ‘C’ Proforma. Based on the comments received and the revised submission made, the building plan proposal for NOC for Completion is found to be accepted.

The Commission decided to take action in the matter without awaiting the confirmation of the minutes of the meeting.