Action Taken Reports in respect of minutes of the 1880th meeting held on 23.07.2026.

1. Action Taken Reports in respect of minutes of the 1880th meeting held on 23.07.2026 were discussed.

1. The South-DMC forwarded (through email) the proposal for consideration by the Commission.
2. Earlier, the Commission approved the layout and building plan proposal at its meeting held on July 02, 1981. The Commission approved the building plan proposal for additions and alterations, comprising the construction of the Golden Jubilee Block (Block A) and the Canteen & Classroom Block (Block B), at its meeting held on March 09, 2023 specific observations were given.
3. The Commission did not accept the NOC for Completion received at Completion stage at its meeting held on July 16, 2026; specific observations were given.
4. The proposal for Part NOC for Completion (Golden Jubilee Block) received (through email) at the Completion stage was scrutinized along with the replies submitted to the previous observations of the Commission communicated vide DUAC observation letter no: OL-15072658063 dated 27.07.2026.  Based on the revised submission, drawings, documentation, site photographs, and the replies submitted, the proposal for part NOC for Completion (Golden Jubilee Block) is accepted.

1. The North-DMC forwarded (through OPAAS) the proposal for consideration by the Commission.
2. No previous record of any formal approval or completion approval granted by the Commission has been found in the records available with the Commission. 
3. The building plans proposal for residential building (comprising of basement + ground + 2 floors) received (through OPAAS) at the formal stage was scrutinised. Based on the submission made, including drawings, documentations and site photographs, the following observations are to be complied with:

a) It was observed from the submitted site photographs that the submission is for demolition/reconstruction, as the existing building is being demolished and a new building comprising basement + ground + two upper floors is proposed.

b) It was observed that the same credentials for the architect and the owner including email ID and the mobile number have been used which is not appreciated.

c) The Commission observed that the proposed planning envisages independent dwelling units with separate access. It was further observed that the building extends up to the right-side plot boundary without the requisite side setback. The feasibility of providing the prescribed side setback may be explored, wherever permissible under the applicable Building Bye-Laws, as it would facilitate better light and ventilation and contribute to a more balanced and visually coherent built form (in terms of points no. 5 of the CPAA (Criterion for Project Assessment and Approval)), as available on the DUAC website at www.duac.org.in.

d) It was observed that the proposed basement plan indicates provision only for two-wheeler parking. Further, the submitted site plan does not clearly depict the overall parking layout, including the location and number of car parking spaces, vehicular entry and exit points, internal circulation, and access to the basement etc., rendering the submission incomprehensible. The same shall be elaborated with necessary details. All parking provisions shall adhere to all the applicable norms/guidelines/regulations, etc. (in terms of points no. 18 of the CPAA (Criterion for Project Assessment and Approval)), as available on the DUAC website at www.duac.org.in.

e) As per Google Earth imagery provided by the architect it was observed that the trees are present on the site. However, the proposed site plan does not indicate how these existing trees are proposed to be preserved or integrated into the landscape design of the development. As the proposal comprises substantial landscape areas, a comprehensive landscape plan shall be submitted (in terms of points no. 6 of the CPAA (Criterion for Project Assessment and Approval)), as available on the DUAC website at www.duac.org.in.

f) The Commission observed that the proposed façade lacks adequate architectural articulation, particularly in terms of a coherent material palette, appropriate architectural elements and integrated sun-shading provisions. The façade also appears visually cluttered due to the use of multiple architectural elements, including varied Jaali patterns and railing designs, which affect the overall proportions, visual harmony and aesthetic quality of the building.

The façade design may therefore be rationalised by adopting a simpler and more consistent architectural language, with uniform Jaali patterns and railing details, wherever feasible, and suitably integrated sun-shading elements. It was further observed that the proposed mumty appears disproportionately tall in relation to the building, adversely affecting the overall architectural composition. The size and height of the mumty may accordingly be reviewed to achieve better proportions, visual balance and a cohesive and harmonious architectural expression (in terms of points no. 8 & 9 of the CPAA (Criterion for Project Assessment and Approval)), as available on the DUAC website at www.duac.org.in.

g) It was observed that the front entrance steps leading directly to the drawing/dining area have been proposed without an intermediate landing space, which may affect user safety and convenience. The design shall be suitably revised to provide the requisite landing and a well-integrated overhead projection for weather protection, ensuring both functional safety and architectural coherence.

h) The proposal has been submitted at the formal stage; however, the structural arrangements have not been adequately incorporated into the design scheme. This may affect the functionality and planning of the internal spaces, including the proposed furniture layout. The structural elements shall therefore be duly integrated into the design and reflected in the submission for consideration and review by the Commission.

i) Provision for plumbing shafts shall be suitably incorporated at this stage to adequately accommodate all plumbing pipes. The rainwater pipes shall also be appropriately planned and suitably screened using compatible materials, wherever required, so as to ensure their proper integration with the building design without adversely affecting the aesthetics of the façade.

4. Overall, the proposal received at the formal stage lacks clarity, and needs improvement. The architect is advised to adhere to all the above observations and provide a point-by-point incorporation and response.

1. The North-DMC forwarded (through OPAAS) the proposal for consideration by the Commission.
2. No previous record of any formal approval or completion approval granted by the Commission has been found in the records available with the Commission. 
3. The building plans proposal for residential building (comprising of ground +3 floors) received (through OPAAS) at the formal stage was scrutinised. Based on the submission made, including drawings, documentations and site photographs, the following observations are to be complied with:

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

b) It shall be ensured that all projections are contained entirely within the plot boundaries and that no projection extends over the municipal road. The concerned local body shall ensure compliance with the applicable provisions of the Unified Building Bye-Laws (UBBL), prevailing norms, regulations, and other statutory requirements.

c) The architect is also advised to go through the DUAC Memorandums issued vide letter no: 1(2)/82-DUAC dated 07.10.2025 (available on the DUAC website www.duac.org.in) for various issues related to the DUAC approvals.

1. The North-DMC forwarded (through email) the proposal for consideration by the Commission.
2. The Commission did not approve the building plans proposal for additions and alterations at its meeting held on July 30, 2026; specific observations were given.
3. The building plans proposal for additions/alterations (alterations in existing ground and proposed basement, first, second and third floors) received (through email) at the formal stage was scrutinised along with the previous observations of the Commission communicated vide DUAC observation letter no: OL-29072623203 dated 05.08.2026. Based on the revised submission made, including drawings, documentations and site photographs, the following observations are to be complied with:

a) The Commission noted that when evaluating the case for additions or alterations, it did not take into account the existing built construction at the site. This relates only to the proposal for additions and alterations.

b) The proposal is for the additions/alterations, a lot of live/dead load is being added to the existing building. Structure shall be designed to withstand weather effects and impacts from calamities such as earthquakes, etc., as it is an additional structure added to the existing superstructure. The local body shall ensure the structural safety of the additions/alterations done on the existing superstructure.

c) It shall be ensured that all projections are contained entirely within the plot boundaries and that no projection extends over the municipal road. The concerned local body shall ensure compliance with the applicable provisions of the Unified Building Bye-Laws (UBBL), prevailing norms, regulations, and other statutory requirements.

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

e) The architect is also advised to go through the DUAC Memorandums issued vide letter no: 1(2)/82-DUAC dated 07.10.2025 (available on the DUAC website www.duac.org.in) for various issues related to the DUAC approvals.

1. The North-DMC forwarded (through email) the proposal for consideration by the Commission.
2. The Commission did not approve the building plans proposal for additions and alterations at its meeting held on July 23, 2026; specific observations were given.
3. The building plans proposal for additions and alterations in residential building (alterations in existing ground and proposed basement, first, second and third floors) received (through email) at the formal stage was scrutinised along with the previous observations of the Commission communicated vide DUAC observation letter no: OL-21072623202 dated 29.07.2026. Based on the revised submission made, including drawings, documentations and photographs submitted, the following observations are to be complied with:

a) The Commission noted that when evaluating the case for additions or alterations, it did not take into account the existing built construction at the site. This relates only to the proposal for additions and alterations.

b) The proposal is for the additions/alterations, a lot of live/dead load is being added to the existing building. Structure shall be designed to withstand weather effects and impacts from calamities such as earthquakes, etc., as it is an additional structure added to the existing superstructure. The local body shall ensure the structural safety of the additions/alterations done on the existing superstructure.

c) Considering the proposed alterations, including the basement, and the site's location within a densely built-up area, the concerned local body shall ensure that appropriate structural stability, excavation support, and construction safety measures are adopted to safeguard the existing building and adjoining structures during construction.

d) It shall be ensured that all projections are contained entirely within the plot boundaries and that no projection extends over the municipal road. The concerned local body shall ensure compliance with the applicable provisions of the Unified Building Bye-Laws (UBBL), prevailing norms, regulations, and other statutory requirements.

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

f) The architect is also advised to go through the DUAC Memorandums issued vide letter no: 1(2)/82-DUAC dated 07.10.2025 (available on the DUAC website www.duac.org.in) for various issues related to the DUAC approvals.

1. The NDMC forwarded (through OPAAS) the proposal for consideration by the Commission.
2. No previous record of any formal approval or completion approval granted by the Commission has been found in the records available with the Commission. 
3. The building plans proposal for demolition and reconstruction (comprising of ground + 2 floors) received (through OPAAS) at the formal stage was scrutinised. Based on the submission made, including drawings, documentations and photographs submitted, the following observations are to be complied with:

a) The Commission observed that the proposal has been examined solely from the perspective of architectural quality, urban aesthetics, and visual considerations.

b) The entire proposal shall adhere to all the norms/regulations of the prevailing LBZ guidelines.

c) All parking provisions shall adhere to all the applicable norms/guidelines/regulations, etc. (in terms of points no. 18 of the CPAA (Criterion for Project Assessment and Approval)), as available on the DUAC website at www.duac.org.in.

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

e) The architect is also advised to go through the DUAC Memorandums issued vide letter no: 1(2)/82-DUAC dated 07.10.2025 (available on the DUAC website www.duac.org.in) for various issues related to the DUAC approvals.

1. The DDA forwarded (through email) the proposal for consideration by the Commission.
2. The Commission approved the layout and building plans proposal (hospital block-A-3B+G+7; Nurse hostel: B+G+6; Dormitory: B+G+5; Mortuary: B+G+1; Dr Residence: B+G+6, and Guest house) at its meeting held on November 18, 2009.
3. The Commission approved the revised building plans proposal (hospital- B + G + 8 floors) at its meeting held on March 31, 2017. The Commission approved the building, plans proposal for additions/alterations for addition of two floors (9th & 10th floor over existing hospital building B+G+8 floors), proposed new Hospital Block (3B + G +1 floor) and Utility Block (3B+G floor) at its meeting held on December 15, 2022 specific observations were given.
4. The Commission accepted the NOC for Completion (part-Block A) at its meeting held on March 21, 2024. The Commission did not accept the NOC for Completion (Part Block-B comprising of 3B+G+1) received at Completion stage at its meeting held on June 18, 2026; specific observations were given.
5. The proposal for NOC for Completion (Part-Block B comprising of 3B+G+1 floors) received (through email) at the Completion stage was scrutinized along with the previous observations of the Commission communicated vide DUAC observation letter no: OL-18032448030 dated 27.07.2026, and the replies submitted. Based on the revised submission, including the Completion, drawings, supporting documentation, site photographs, and the replies submitted, the proposal for Part NOC for Completion (Block-B) is accepted.

1. The NDMC forwarded (through OPAAS) the proposal for consideration by the Commission.
2. The Commission accepted earlier the concept of the proposal at its meeting held on March 27, 2019, and specific observations were given.
3. The Commission approved the Redevelopment of GPRA colony, Sarojini Nagar at its meeting held on January 17, 2020, specific observations were given.
4. The proposal for NOC for Completion plans (PKG IXB, Type VI Quarters, Tower 13 to 20 (Phase I)) received (through OPAAS) at the Completion stage was scrutinized.  Based on the submission made, including the Completion, drawings, supporting documentation, site photographs, and approval given (formal stage), the following observations are to be complied with:

a) The Commission, upon examining the comparative statement submitted by the Architect indicating the sanctioned proposal vis-a-vis the actual construction, observed that major modifications have been made from the Master Plan approved by the Commission in its meeting held on 17.01.2020. Similar variations have also been noted in the successive submissions for part NOC for Completion pertaining to different phases of the redevelopment of the GPRA Colony, Sarojini Nagar.

b) During consideration of one of the submissions for part NOC for Completion pertaining to the GPRA redevelopment at Sarojini Nagar, in its meeting held on 09.04.2026, the Commission observed that:

“.... It was observed that the submission refers to the Master Plan as “proposed,” whereas comparisons with the approved Master Plan for the redevelopment of the GPRA colony, including modifications, affected areas, and parking calculations, have not been adequately presented. A revised, corrected, and coordinated submission, with appropriate nomenclature and necessary modifications, shall be furnished for better understanding by the Commission....”

c) It was again observed that the Architect has submitted the part NOC for Completion proposal without first revising and updating the overall Master Plan of the GPRA, Sarojini Nagar, despite the observations and assurances recorded in this regard. The Commission, therefore, decided that the complete Master Plan of the GPRA, Sarojini Nagar, approved by the Commission on 17.01.2020, shall be comprehensively revised to incorporate all modifications and changes carried out from the date of the original approval up to the present, including all part NOCs for Completion obtained to date, works completed, works under execution, and the development proposed/likely to be undertaken in future. The revised Master Plan shall present a consolidated and updated picture of the entire redevelopment scheme, duly reflecting the present and envisaged development of the campus, and shall be submitted to the Commission for consideration and approval before any further part NOC for Completion proposals are submitted.

d) In view of the above, the Commission decided that no further part NOC for Completion proposal pertaining to the GPRA, Sarojini Nagar, shall be taken up for consideration until the comprehensive revised Master Plan, incorporating the above-mentioned modifications and future provisions, is submitted and approved by the Commission. This shall enable the Commission to examine subsequent part NOC for Completion proposals in their entirety and in the context of the approved overall development plan, thereby facilitating their judicious consideration.

5. Overall, the proposal received at the Part NOC for Completion stage lacks clarity, and needs improvement. The architect is advised to adhere to all the above observations and provide a point-by-point incorporation and response.

1. The CPWD forwarded (through OPAAS) the proposal for consideration by the Commission.
2. The ‘Building within President Estate’ is a listed Grade-I heritage building at Serial No. 5 in the Gazette notification no. F. No. 4/2/2009/UD/I 6565 dated October 1, 2009, issued by the Department of Urban Development, Govt. of NCT of Delhi.
3. The Commission approved the proposal for the Comprehensive Conservation Management Plan of President Estate at its meeting held on November 21, 2013; specific observations were made.
4. The building plan proposal for upgradation of existing horse stable and proposal for additional horse stables at President Estate received (through OPAAS) at the formal stage were scrutinised.  Based on the submission made, including drawings and photographs, etc., the following observations are to be complied with:

a) The Commission observed that the proposal has been examined solely from the perspective of architectural quality, urban aesthetics, and visual considerations. Other DCR norms/regulations including compliances to the Comprehensive Conservation Management Plan (CCMP) of President Estate approved in the meeting held on November 21, 2013, shall be ensured by the CPWD.

b) It was observed from the submitted 3D visualisations that rectangular structural columns have been proposed along the external edges of the horse enclosures. Considering the intended use, such columns may pose a risk of injury to the horses. The feasibility of adopting circular columns or other suitably rounded structural elements may therefore be explored to enhance safety without compromising the overall architectural design.

c) Any further modifications and revisions in the design shall be referred back to the Commission for its approval.

d) All rainwater pipes, service equipment, water tanks, etc., should be camouflaged appropriately (in terms of points nos. 10, 11, and 12 of the CPAA (Criterion for Project Assessment and Approval), as available on the DUAC website at www.duac.org.in.

e) The architect is also advised to go through the DUAC Memorandums issued vide letter no: 1(2)/82-DUAC dated 07.10.2025 (available on the DUAC website www.duac.org.in) for various issues related to the DUAC approvals.

1. The DDA forwarded (through OPAAS) the proposal for consideration by the Commission.
2. The Commission accepted the concept of the building plans proposal at its meeting held on October 26, 2023; specific observations were given. The Commission approved the revised building plans proposal received at formal stage at its meeting held on December 14, 2023; specific observations were given.
3. The proposal for NOC for Completion plans (Himachal Niketan) received (through OPAAS) at the Completion stage was scrutinized along with the submission made at the time of approval (formal) given.  Based on the submission, including the Completion, drawings, supporting documentation, site photographs, and approval (formal) given, the following observations are to be complied with:

a) The Commission observed from the submitted documentation and site photographs that construction and finishing works are still in progress, including landscape works, with construction materials, scaffolding, and other site-related items lying at various locations. It was further observed that certain deviations, including changes to the main gate and boundary wall, have been made from the approved proposal without indicating the reasons or corresponding details in the submission. The revised submission shall clearly indicate the status and extent of all completed, ongoing, and modified works, along with updated drawings, for the Commission's review.

b) The proposal has been submitted for NOC for Completion; however, adequate clear and uncut photographs of the actual built construction of the building blocks under consideration have not been furnished. The revised submission shall include updated, uncut photographs from all sides, presented in a comparative “Before” (DUAC-approved design scheme) and “After” (actual as-built condition) format, clearly depicting the approved proposal vis-a-vis the works executed at site.

The photographs shall be duly labelled and annotated to identify the relevant blocks and portions under consideration, including the basement, terraces with installed utilities/solar panels, common public interface areas, parking areas, main entrance, works of completed public art, and boundary walls. Since the proposal is being considered at the Completion Stage, the photographic documentation shall clearly establish the actual works executed vis-a-vis the drawings approved at the Formal Stage, for the judicious review of the Commission.

c) The proposal for NOC for Completion shall be submitted only after all works, including civil, landscape, and other associated works, have been completed on site.

4. Overall, the proposal received at the NOC for Completion stage needs improvement. The architect is advised to adhere to all the above observations and provide a point-by-point incorporation and response.

1. The DIAL forwarded (through email) the proposal for consideration by the Commission.
2. Earlier, the Commission approved the layout/master plan of LP1-A, Hospitality District at its meeting on February 12, 2018. The Commission accepted the building plans at conceptual stage on June 12, 2019. The building plans proposal at formal stage was approved on October 12, 2019. The Commission approved the revised building plans for additions and alterations at its meeting on May 30, 2024, specific observations were given.
3. The Commission did not accept the NOC for completion (part) plans proposal for Commercial Block of Asset no. 13 Hospitality District, Delhi Aerocity at its meeting held on June 18, 2026; specific observations were given.
4. The proposal for NOC for Completion (Part-only for Commercial: Business centre and office (shown as a separate block)) received (through e-mail) at the Completion stage was scrutinized along with the previous observations of the Commission communicated vide DUAC observation letter no: OL-16062666001 dated 25.06.2026. Based on the revised submission, including the Completion drawings (as shown as a separate block), supporting documentation, site photographs, and email dated 06.08.2026, the proposal for Part NOC for completion (Commercial block including all six basements) is accepted.

Building plan proposal in respect of Residential building (Stilt+G+3) at plot no. 1233, Mahal Sarai, Kashmere Gate. (Conceptual Stage)

1. The proposal was forwarded directly by the Architect (through OPAAS) for consideration by the Commission.
2. The proposal was deferred.

Revised Building Plans Proposal in respect of Group Housing at 7 Court Road, Civil Lines Delhi. (Conceptual stage)

1. The proposal was forwarded directly by the Architect (online) for consideration by the Commission.
2. The Commission approved the layout and building plans proposal at its meeting on October 20, 2022, but did not approve the revised proposal at its meeting on January 16, 2025; specific observations were made.
3. The ‘Residence at Court Road, Rajpur Road’ is a listed Grade-III heritage building at Serial No. 8 in the Gazette notification no. F. No. 7 (367)/227/2002/UD/841 dated February 25, 2010, issued by the Department of Urban Development, Govt. of NCT of Delhi.
4. The revised layout and building plans 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 Observation letter no: OL-19102223068, F. No. 23(68)/2022-DUAC dated 23.01.2025. Based on the drawings, documentations, site report etc., the following observations are to be complied with:

a) The Commission observed that the proposed façade appears visually cluttered due to the incorporation of multiple architectural elements, mouldings, and decorative features. The architectural vocabulary and façade treatment shall be rationalised and simplified to achieve a more cohesive and harmonious architectural expression. The revised façade shall be appropriately detailed and annotated with materials and finishes suited to the surrounding context. The proposal, including coordinated elevations and 3D views with material specifications, shall be submitted with all requisite details at the Formal Stage for consideration of the Commission.

b) The overall elevations of the building complex shall be revisited from the street-view perspective, with due consideration to visual quality and overall aesthetics. The architectural elements, materials, textures, and finishes shall be suitably harmonised to achieve a cohesive and complementary architectural expression across the complex. The revised proposal shall be suitably detailed and elucidated in the Formal Stage submission.

c) Appropriate provisions for drying clothes, accommodating outdoor air conditioners, rainwater provisions in the balconies, and their screening mechanisms must be planned at this stage.

d) Though, the elevations and the sections of the structure have been given but they are not sufficiently explained with clarity. Detailed skin sections shall also be submitted to clearly illustrate the façade treatment, including material specifications and provisions for weather protection. To ensure a thorough evaluation of the proposal, detailed sections, including longitudinal and cross-sections that encompass the entire site, must be submitted.

e) Provision for plumbing shafts shall be suitably incorporated at this stage to adequately accommodate all plumbing pipes. The rainwater pipes shall also be appropriately planned and suitably screened using compatible materials, wherever required, so as to ensure their proper integration with the building design without adversely affecting the aesthetics of the façade.

f) The extent of green/open landscaped areas shall not be reduced below that indicated in the layout plan previously approved by the Commission in its meeting held on 20.10.2022.

g) A combined mobility plan showing seamless, conflict-free pedestrian and vehicular movement plan from outside to the various parts of the buildings to be submitted, to understand the movement pattern within the site. All parking provisions shall adhere to all the applicable norms/guidelines/regulations, etc. (in terms of points no. 18 of the CPAA (Criterion for Project Assessment and Approval)), as available on the DUAC website at www.duac.org.in.

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

i) The installation of clear-story solar panels on a well-designed structural frame, integrated with the building design, is suggested to ensure the effective utilisation of the space beneath, subject to feasibility as per building bye-laws. This placement also facilitates easy maintenance, reduces heat load through increased shading, and improves aesthetics. The sustainability features shall be as per Point 7 of the CPAA (Criterion for Project Assessment and Approval), available on the DUAC website at www.duac.org.in.

5. Overall, the architect is advised to adhere to all the above observations and provide a point-by-point incorporation and response in the next submission i.e., formal stage.

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.