Action Taken Reports in respect of minutes of the 1875th meeting held on 25.06.2026.

1. Action Taken Reports in respect of minutes of the 1875th meeting held on 25.06.2026 were discussed.

Building plans in respect of Construction of Motel building at Kh No. 162,163,164 & 165 Village Sultanpur, Mehrauli-Gurgaon Road.

1. The South-DMC forwarded (through OPAAS) the proposal for consideration by the Commission.
2. The Commission did not approve the proposal for additions and alterations at its meetings held on January 29, 2026 specific observations were given, and noted the submission at its meeting held on February 26, 2026.  
3. The building plans proposal for a proposed new building (3B+G+11 floors) received (through OPAAS) at formal stage was scrutinised. Based on the submission made, including drawings and photographs, etc., the following observations are to be complied with:

a) It was noted that the earlier proposal pertained to additions and alterations, whereas the present proposal envisages the complete demolition and reconstruction of the building comprising 3 Basements, Ground Floor, and 11 upper floors (3B+G+11). The Commission further observed from the submitted drawings that an overhead electrical transmission line passes through the site.

b) It was observed that incorrect particulars have been furnished in the submission, as the details of the Architect and the Owner/Proponent, including the e-mail ID and contact information, are identical. In this regard, attention is invited to the Commission's decision taken at its meeting held on 18.06.2026 and the Memorandum No. 1(2)/1982-DUAC dated 01.07.2026 (available on DUAC web-site www.duac.org.in)  regarding the mandatory submission of complete and correct particulars of the Owner/Proponent and the Architect for consideration of proposals by the Commission, which stipulates that:

“...  It was noted that all proposals submitted to the Commission, irrespective of the stage of submission (Conceptual, Formal, and Completion stage), shall mandatorily include complete and correct particulars of both the Owner/Proponent and the Architect, including their name, postal address, contact number, and a valid e-mail address. Proposals that do not furnish the requisite information in the prescribed manner shall be treated as incomplete and shall not be considered by the Commission. thus the architect to ensure that complete and accurate documentation shall be submitted to facilitate effective communication and meaningful deliberations during the review process…”

c) The submission is incomplete, as it does not include the demolition plan and comprehensive 3D views of the proposed development. The Architect shall submit complete, self-explanatory, and annotated 3D views from all sides, including bird's-eye views, clearly depicting the proposed design scheme. The 3D views shall correspond with the submitted drawings and appropriately annotate the façade material specifications and other significant architectural elements to facilitate a comprehensive understanding of the proposal by the Commission.

d) The photographs of the existing context have not been provided clearly to understand the existing situation in the right context.  An appropriate nos. of site photographs shall be provided to get in-depth clarity of the site and surroundings. They need to be resubmitted with proper uncut views from all sides.

e) The submitted plans, elevations, sections, and other drawings are of inadequate quality and do not sufficiently explain the design scheme proposed at the Formal Stage. The Architect shall submit detailed, legible, and coordinated drawings, including plans, elevations, longitudinal and cross-sections (including site sections), clearly depicting all architectural elements, façade treatments, material specifications, HT line passing through the site and sun-shading devices. Detailed façade skin sections shall also be provided to explain the construction, and materiality, of the proposed building envelope. The revised drawings shall be consistent with the submitted 3D views for better understanding of the proposal.

f) It shall be ensured that the building is provided with a lift serving all upper floors, in accordance with the principles of universal accessibility and the applicable Building Bye-Laws.

g) Three level of basement has been provided to fulfil the requisite parking requirements, the same shall also be elucidated with movement pattern. 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) It was observed that the proposed basement extends into the front setback. The Architect shall ensure that the basement remains within the permissible building line and setback limits in accordance with the applicable building bye-laws and other statutory regulations.

i) A combined mobility circulation plan showing seamless, conflict-free pedestrian and vehicular movement plans from outside is to be submitted, to understand the movement pattern within the site better. It shall be indicated clearly with clear segregation of pedestrian and vehicular movement.

j) The submission does not adequately depict the overall structural arrangement of the proposed building. The Architect shall incorporate the structural layout, other major structural elements, in the relevant drawings to form a complete, comprehensive submission.

k) The proposal envisages multiple restaurant, and banquet facilities; however, their seating capacities and associated service infrastructure have not been indicated. Considering the scale of the development and the likely generation of dry, wet, food, and other solid waste, the Architect shall submit a detailed Solid Waste Management (SWM) Plan, clearly indicating the provisions for waste segregation, collection, storage, and disposal in accordance with the applicable statutory guidelines. The location and capacity of the SWM facilities, along with associated service areas, shall be clearly marked on the site plan to determine an integrated and environmentally sustainable waste management strategy.

l) Functional furniture layouts for typical areas shall be submitted to establish the efficiency, usability, and operational functionality of the proposed spaces. The drawings shall clearly show furniture arrangements, circulation, and space utilisation to facilitate a better understanding of the design scheme by the Commission.

m) The Commission observed that the main entrance gate and boundary wall establish the first point of visual interaction with the development and significantly influence its architectural character. The Architect shall submit a comprehensive design proposal for the main gate and boundary wall, including plans, elevations, sections, material specifications, grill details, lighting, signage (if any), and other relevant architectural details, to clearly explain the design intent and demonstrate their integration with the overall architectural vocabulary of the project.

n) Considering the site area of 12,389.92 sq. m, adequate provisions for public toilet/washroom complexes shall be made in accordance with the Unified Building Bye-Laws for Delhi 2016, Chapter 12 "Swachh Delhi": Provisions for Public Washroom Complexes. The revised submission shall include detailed plans, elevations, sections, 3D views, material specifications, screening arrangements, accessibility features, and other relevant architectural details to facilitate a comprehensive review by the Commission.

o) The submitted landscape proposal lacks sufficient clarity. A detailed landscape plan shall be submitted at an appropriate scale, clearly indicating the hardscape and softscape areas, existing and proposed trees, species, plantation details, site levels, and other landscape elements (in terms of points nos. 6 of the CPAA (Criterion for Project Assessment and Approval), as available on the DUAC website at www.duac.org.in.

p) 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.

q) The Work of public art of suitable scale, size and material, imparting character and identity to the complex shall ensure to be installed in terms of point nos. 14 of the CPAA (Criterion for Project Assessment and Approval) and Memorandum dated October 07, 2025 available on the DUAC website at www.duac.org.in. Any deviations in the artwork from the approved design must be submitted to the Commission for prior approval before the commencement of construction, to ensure compliance and facilitate final approval upon project completion.

r) 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.

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

Building plans proposal in respect of Residential building at plot no. 1233, Mahal Sarai, Kashmere Gate.

1. The North-DMC forwarded (through OPAAS) the proposal for consideration by the Commission. 
2. The Commission did not approve (formal) the proposal for additions and alterations at its meetings held on December 24, 2025 and May 19, 2026; specific observations were given.
3. The building plans proposal received (through OPAAS) at the formal stage was scrutinised along with the previous observations of the Commission communicated vide DUAC observation letter no: OL-18122523181 dated 27.05.2026.  Based on the submission made, including previous observations, drawings and photographs, etc., the following observations are to be complied with:

a) The Commission observed that detailed observations been communicated vide Letter No. OL-18122523181 dated 30.12.2025, with the advice that:

“….. The architect is advised to adhere to all the above observations and provide a point-by-point incorporation and response…”

However, the Architect has not submitted any response or point-wise compliance to the observations communicated by the Commission, which the Commission noted and did not appreciate the lack of response and compliance.

b) A discrepancy was observed in the submission (formal stage) with respect to the project title which is:

“…..Residential building at plot no. 1233, Mahal Sarai, Kashmere Gate...”

However, the demolition plan bears the address as:

“…..existing building plan for demolished of a residential building on mpl old nos: - 2038, 2058-59 and new nos-4069 to 4073, 4117, to 4121, Gali sate Wali, chawri bazar-Nai sark, ward no-vi, delhi-110006….”

The Architect shall ensure that the correct project title and all associated particulars are consistently reflected across all submitted documents in the revised submission to facilitate proper review and documentation by the Commission.

c) It was observed from the submitted site photographs that the existing building has been substantially demolished, except for the front façade, which exhibits heritage architectural elements contributing to the character of the surrounding built environment. However, the proposed façade does not adequately respond to or reflect these contextual characteristics. The Architect shall review and revise the façade design by appropriately incorporating the significant architectural elements of the existing frontage, so as to achieve a contextually responsive development that integrates harmoniously with its surroundings while respecting the heritage character of the area.

d)    The submitted sections do not correspond with the proposed elevations, as the architectural elements and façade features shown in the elevations are not adequately reflected in the sections. The drawings shall be revised to ensure consistency between the plans, elevations, sections, and 3D views, accurately depicting all proposed architectural elements and façade treatments to facilitate a clear understanding and assessment of the proposal.

e)    Detailed façade skin sections shall also be provided to explain the construction, and materiality, of the proposed building envelope. The revised drawings shall be consistent with the submitted 3D views for better understanding of the proposal. 

f)    The provisions for road widening shall be addressed by the concerned local body in accordance with prevailing applicable Building Byelaws, and applicable statutory provisions.

g)    It shall be ensured that all projections are contained entirely within the plot boundaries and comply with the applicable Building Bye-Laws and statutory provisions.

4. Overall, the proposal received at the formal stage lacks clarity, especially in view of the unsatisfactory compliance to its previous observations communicated vide DUAC observation letter no: OL-18122523181 dated December 30, 2025 and May 27, 2026. The architect is advised to adhere to all the above observations and provide a point-by-point incorporation and response.
    

Building plans proposal in respect of Commercial cum Residential building at 2050-2051 ward no. VIII, Main Road, Sita Ram Bazar.

1. The North-DMC forwarded (through OPAAS) the proposal for consideration by the Commission.
2. The Commission did not approve the building plans proposal (for Commercial cum Residential building) received at formal stage at its meetings held on June 4, 2026 and June 25, 2026; specific observations were given.
3. The building plans proposal for Commercial cum residential building (comprising of ground + three floors) received (through OPAAS) at the formal stage was scrutinised along with the replies submitted to the previous observations of the Commission communicated vide DUAC letter no: OL-23062623024 dated 30-06-2026. Based on the submission made, including previous observations given, drawings, documentations, photographs and replies submitted etc, the following observations are to be complied with:

a) It was observed that inconsistent particulars of the Architect have been furnished in the submission. Different names of the Architect have been indicated in the documents submitted at the Formal Stage (Mr. Manish Nath in the project proforma and Mr. Abdul Wahid in the Project Report), which was not appreciated by the Commission. The Architect shall ensure that the correct and updated particulars are consistently reflected across all drawings and documents in the revised submission to facilitate an appropriate review by the Commission.

b) While considering the proposal at its meeting held on June 25, 2026, a detailed discussion was held with the architect and the observations communicated vide DUAC Letter No. OL-23062623024 dated 30.06.2026 stated that:

“ (a)… it was observed that the replies furnished pertained to observations that had not been communicated by the Commission, while the actual observations remained unaddressed. The Commission did not appreciate this approach

…b) The Architect was accordingly advised to submit a point-wise compliance report against the observations actually communicated by the Commission…”

Despite the Commission providing the Architect with an opportunity during the meeting to correct the replies and resubmit the compliance on the same day, the revised submission was not received. It was further noted with concern that the Architect had once again furnished replies pertaining to observations that had never been communicated by the Commission, while the actual observations remained unaddressed, which was not appreciated by the Commission.

c) It was further observed that the reference to the Commission's observation letter quoted by the Architect is incorrect. The submission refers to Observation Letter No. 20029598, whereas the observations were communicated vide DUAC Observation Letter No. OL-23062623024 dated 30.06.2026. Such inaccuracies are not appreciated. The Architect shall ensure that replies are furnished against the correct observations communicated by the Commission to facilitate a judicious review of the proposal

4. Overall, the proposal submitted at the Formal Stage lacks the requisite clarity and completeness, particularly in view of the unsatisfactory compliance and incorrect replies furnished against the Commission's observations communicated vide DUAC Observation Letter No. OL-23062623024 dated 30.06.2026. The actual observations remain largely unaddressed, thereby hindering a meaningful assessment of the proposal by the Commission. The Architect shall furnish a detailed point-wise reply to all observations of the Commission, including those communicated vide DUAC Observation Letter No. OL-23062623024 dated 30.06.2026, and ensure that the revised submission adequately addresses each observation.

Building Plans Proposal in respect of Service Apartments at Village Samalkha, New Delhi.

1. The South-DMC forwarded (through OPAAS) the proposal for consideration by the Commission.
2. The Commission did not approve (formal) the proposal for Service Apartments at its meeting held on May 6, 2026; specific observations were given.
3. The building plans proposal for service apartments (3 basements + ground + 9 floors) received (through OPAAS) at the formal stage was scrutinized along with the replies submitted to the previous observations of the Commission communicated vide DUAC letter no: OL-04052655011 dated 13-05-2026. Based on the submission made, including drawings, documentations, photographs and replies submitted etc, the following observations are to be complied with:

a) It was observed that planters have been provided in the balconies. The Architect shall ensure appropriate drainage, waterproofing, and screening provisions to prevent water runoff or staining of the façade and to maintain the overall architectural character and appearance of the building.

b) It was observed that the proposed building has a semi-circular form. The solar photovoltaic (PV) panels proposed on the terrace shall be suitably oriented and optimally positioned in accordance with the solar path to maximise energy generation, while ensuring that their integration does not adversely affect the architectural character and visual aesthetics of the building.

c) It shall be ensured that the building is equipped with a lift providing access to the upper floors, in compliance with the principles of universal accessibility.

d) Double-stack parking systems have been proposed in Basement-1 and Basement-3 to fulfil the requisite parking requirement. The Architect/Proponent shall ensure their proper implementation and operational functionality at site. Compliance with the approved parking arrangement shall be examined by the Commission at the time of consideration of the proposal for NOC for Completion.

e) 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.

f) 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.

g) The Work of public art of suitable scale, size and material, imparting character and identity to the complex shall ensure to be installed in terms of point nos. 14 of the CPAA (Criterion for Project Assessment and Approval) and Memorandum dated October 07, 2025 available on the DUAC website at www.duac.org.in. Any deviations in the artwork from the approved design must be submitted to the Commission for prior approval before the commencement of construction, to ensure compliance and facilitate final approval upon project completion.

h) 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. The Architect shall ensure that the orientation of the proposed solar panels is in accordance with the solar orientation.

Completion plans proposal in respect of Commercial Novelty Street at Cinema Land, Main Road, SPM Marg, Near Old Delhi Railway Station.

1. The North-DMC forwarded (through email) the proposal for consideration by the Commission.
2. The proposal was deferred.

Building plans proposal in respect of “R7 Residential Housing 01, DU Dhaka Campus, New Delhi”.

1. The North-DMC forwarded (through OPAAS) the proposal for consideration by the Commission.
2. The Commission did not approve the building plans proposal (formal stage) at its meeting held on March 25, 2026; specific observations were given.
3. The building plans proposal (for girls and boys hostel (B+G+9 floors) and amenities block (B+G+2 floors) received (through OPAAS) at the formal stage was scrutinised along with the replies submitted to the previous observations of the Commission communicated vide DUAC letter no: OL-24032623006 dated 02-04-2026. Based on the submission made, including drawings, documentations and replies submitted etc., the following observations are to be complied with:

a) It shall be ensured that the building is equipped with a lift providing access to the upper floors, in compliance with the principles of universal accessibility.

b) 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.

c) 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.

d) The Work of public art of suitable scale, size and material, imparting character and identity to the complex shall ensure to be installed in terms of point nos. 14 of the CPAA (Criterion for Project Assessment and Approval) and Memorandum dated October 07, 2025 available on the DUAC website at www.duac.org.in. Any deviations in the artwork from the approved design must be submitted to the Commission for prior approval before the commencement of construction, to ensure compliance and facilitate final approval upon project completion.

e) 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. The Architect shall ensure that the orientation of the proposed solar panels is in accordance with the solar orientation.
 

Building plans proposal in respect of “Proposed Re-Construction of Residential Building on Plot no. 55 Block-171 Sunder Nagar New Delhi-110003.”

1. The South-DMC forwarded (through OPAAS) the proposal for consideration by the Commission.
2. The Commission did not approve the building plans proposal (formal stage) at its meeting held on April 29, 2026; specific observations were given.
3. The building plans proposal (comprising of basement + ground + 2 upper floors) received (through OPAAS) at the formal stage was scrutinised along with the previous observations of the Commission communicated vide DUAC observation letter no: OL-24042655009 dated 04.05.2026. The Commission intended to discuss the proposal with the architect online but he was not available. Based on the submission made, including documentation, drawings, photographs submitted, previous observations communicated, and unavailability of the architect online, the following observations are to be complied with:

a) It has been observed that the submission has been resubmitted without satisfactorily addressing of previous observations of the Commission outlined in DUAC letter no. OL-24042655009 dated 04.05.2026 especially related to the observation nos.  3(c), and 3(e), the same is reiterated as under:

“…c)       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)          Large balconies have been provided without adequately addressing rainwater discharge and associated screening mechanisms; if not resolved at this stage, exposed RWPs may adversely impact the visual character of the campus. The scheme shall be revised with necessary details, including provisions for RWPs, drying areas, outdoor air conditioners, and appropriate screening to ensure the façade aesthetics are not adversely affected…”

b) The property falls within the jurisdiction of the prevailing LBZ Guidelines. The Architect shall ensure that the proposal complies with all applicable provisions, norms, and regulations stipulated therein.

c) In addition to the above, the proposal appears to be a case of complete demolition and reconstruction. The Architect shall submit a detailed demolition plan, clearly indicating the extent of demolition, site conditions, and the relationship between the existing and proposed development, to facilitate a comprehensive review by the Commission.

d) It was observed that the submitted parking plan is inconsistent with the corresponding 3D views. While the parking plan indicates three parking spaces on the left side of the entrance gate, the 3D views depict a stepped landscaped area at the same location. Similarly, the rear and side portions of the site are shown as landscaped green areas in the 3D views, whereas the parking plan indicates parking spaces at these locations. The Architect shall ensure that the plans, elevations, sections, and 3D views are fully coordinated and consistently reflect the proposed site layout, including the parking and landscape provisions.

e) It is suggested that the provision of gates on either side of the guard house may be explored to facilitate easier access to the parking area and improve vehicular movement 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

f) It shall be ensured that the proposed solar panels are oriented in accordance with the solar orientation and that the same is accurately reflected in the submitted drawings.

g) All plumbing pipes, rainwater pipes, 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.

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

Building plans proposal in respect of Redevelopment of DTC Headquarter Office Building at IP Bus Depot, I.P. Estate, New Delhi.

1. The South-DMC forwarded (through OPAAS) the proposal for consideration by the Commission. 
2. The Commission approved the revised layout plan in its meeting held on 23.07.2014 and subsequently approved the building plan proposal (2B+G+11) at its meeting held on 29.07.2015. 
3.  The Commission did not approve the revised proposal for redevelopment received at formal stage at its meeting held on May 6, 2026; specific observations were given. And accepted the concept of the proposal received at conceptual stage at its meeting held on May 26, 2026; specific observations were given. 
4.  The proposal for Redevelopment of DTC Headquarter Office Building (2 basements + ground + 11 floors) received (through OPAAS) was scrutinised along with the replies submitted to the previous observations of the Commission communicated vide DUAC observation letter no: OL-23052627021 dated 02.06.2026. Based on the submission made, including drawings, documentations, photographs and replies submitted, the following observations are to be complied with: 

a) It shall be ensured that the building is equipped with a lift providing access to the upper floors, in compliance with the principles of universal accessibility.

b) 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.

c) 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.

d) The Work of public art of suitable scale, size and material, imparting character and identity to the complex shall ensure to be installed in terms of point nos. 14 of the CPAA (Criterion for Project Assessment and Approval) and Memorandum dated October 07, 2025 available on the DUAC website at www.duac.org.in. Any deviations in the artwork from the approved design must be submitted to the Commission for prior approval before the commencement of construction, to ensure compliance and facilitate final approval upon project completion.

e) 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.
 

Completion plans proposal in respect of 116 Golf Links.

1. The NDMC forwarded (through email) the proposal for consideration by the Commission.
2. The Commission approved the building plans proposal at its meeting held on November 13, 2019; specific observations were given.
3. The Commission approved the revised building plans proposal for additions/alterations (Upgradation of façade) at its meeting held on June 28, 2024; specific observations were given.
4. The proposal for NOC for completion (comprising of G+2 floors) received (through email) at the completion stage was scrutinised. Based on the submission made, including drawings, documentations, photographs, the proposal for NOC for Completion ( G+2 floors) is accepted.

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

1. The DDA forwarded (through email) the proposal for consideration by the Commission.
2. The proposal was deferred.

1. The DDA forwarded (through email) the proposal for consideration by the Commission.
2. The proposal was deferred.

1. The DDA forwarded (through email) the proposal for consideration by the Commission.
2. The proposal was deferred.

1. The DDA forwarded (through email) the proposal for consideration by the Commission.
2. The proposal was deferred.

1. The NDMC forwarded (through email) the proposal for consideration by the Commission.
2. The proposal was deferred.

1. The DDA forwarded (through email) the proposal for consideration by the Commission.
2. The proposal was deferred.

Building plans proposal in respect of addition and alteration to Hospital building at Plot no. 5, OCF, pocket B, Zone E, E-19, Mayur Vihar Phase II, East Delhi (for Dr. Walia charitable trust). (Conceptual stage)

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

Building plans proposal in respect of Basement + Stilt+ Ground + 3 Storied Residential Building at 4782/1, plot no. 8, Block A, Daryaganj, New Delhi. (Conceptual stage)

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

Building plans proposal in respect of “proposed Building Plan for construction of Residential Building on Property Bearing Mpl. No. - 407 (Old) And 671 (New), Situated at Ward No. VIII, Mohalla Jatwara, Kundewalan, Ajmeri Gate, Delhi-110006”. (Conceptual stage)

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

Building plans proposal in respect of “Addition Alteration of Shree Mahavir Ji Temple, Located G.K-1 New Delhi”. (Conceptual stage)

1. The proposal was forwarded directly by the Architect (online) 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 proposal was deferred.