GCDA may become first local body to serve as appropriate authority for land pooling for a major project
The State Government order dated October 18, 2024, designated the GCDA as the appropriate authority for the proposed land pooling under Section 56 of the Kerala Town and Country Planning (Amendment) Act, into which land pooling rules were incorporated through an extraordinary government gazette dated March 16, 2024.
'Though we have undertaken projects like Kaloor-Kadavanthra Road, which can be construed as executed through land pooling, this is the first time a local body is being designated as the appropriate authority under the land pooling rules,' said GCDA sources.
Out of the 300 acres which the GCDA proposes to make available, 100 acres would be made available to Infopark Kochi, while the remaining 200 acres would be enhanced in value through infrastructure, and a portion of it would be returned to landowners, which is at the heart of the concept of land pooling.
According to the Kerala Land Pooling Rules, 30% of the land would be used for commercial, industrial, and housing purposes, and the remaining land would be returned to landowners. The municipal corporation, municipal council, town panchayat, or village panchayat may, through a resolution, decide to prepare a land pooling scheme in respect of any part of the area within its jurisdiction.
Once not less than 75% of landowners of the proposed land pooling scheme area give their consent, the appropriate authority may issue the final notification for the drafting of the scheme. However, it is mandatory that the landowners who decline to give their consent should also be included in the scheme. Even if the consent is not forthcoming, the appropriate authority may, with the approval of the government, take an appropriate decision with regard to the scheme.
Landowners with plots not less than five hectares in municipal corporations, seven hectares in municipalities, and 10 hectares in panchayats can apply to the appropriate authority for inclusion of their plots in a land pooling scheme in their areas.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Hindustan Times
an hour ago
- Hindustan Times
Maharashtra: 5 facts on GTB Nagar redevelopment, home to 1,200 Sindhi refugee families
The Maharashtra Housing and Area Development Authority (MHADA) has appointed the Rustomjee Group to redevelop 25 buildings in Mumbai's Guru Teg Bahadur Nagar (GTB Nagar), Sion Koliwada. The project aims to rehabilitate 1,200 Sindhi families who migrated to India from Pakistan after Independence. The Maharashtra Housing and Area Development Authority (MHADA) has appointed the Rustomjee Group to redevelop 25 buildings in Mumbai's Guru Teg Bahadur Nagar (GTB Nagar), Sion Koliwada. (Picture for representational purposes only)(Mehul R Thakkar/HT) The colony's redevelopment had been pending for a decade, and the authorities had declared 25 buildings in GTB Nagar to be in a dilapidated condition, prompting the residents to vacate the buildings. Here's what you should know about the GTB Nagar redevelopment project being undertaken by the Rustomjee Group 1) Post-partition refugees rehabilitated in 1,200 homes across 25 buildings since 1957 Beginning in 1957, the government settled over 1,200 refugee families in around 1,200 apartments across 25 buildings constructed specifically for them. Following partition, the central government undertook the rehabilitation of thousands of Hindu Punjabis, Sikh Punjabis, and Sindhi refugees who had crossed into India. In Maharashtra alone, over 30 such colonies were developed, including several in Mumbai. Most of these refugees, originally from Pakistan's Sindh and Punjab provinces, were allotted homes under the Displaced Persons (Compensation and Rehabilitation) Act, 1954. 2) Refugees given homes at a per sq ft price of ₹ 14 In the late 1950s, each apartment allotted to the Sindhi Community cost around ₹ 5,380, with a per sq ft rate of ₹ 14–15. Refugees were allowed to pay in installments, making homeownership feasible, as reported by Moneycontrol. However, today the property rates in the locality range between ₹ 20,000 and ₹ 30,000 per sq ft, and with the redevelopment, prices might touch ₹ 40,000 to ₹ 45,000 per sq ft, local brokers said. Also Read: MHADA appoints Rustomjee Group to redevelop 25 buildings in GTB Nagar, home to 1,200 Sindhi refugee families 3) Why did some residents have to move out? The Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation (BMC) declared the buildings unsafe in 2020 and subsequently demolished several of them. Affected residents were forced to find alternative accommodation on their own, MHADA stated. While many buildings were vacated, some residents either refused to leave or reoccupied them illegally, putting their lives at risk. As a result, the Maharashtra government appointed MHADA to carry out the redevelopment. 4) The redevelopment plan According to MHADA, under the project, 1,200 families will receive 635 sq. ft. apartments in exchange for their current homes in dilapidated buildings. The MHADA has appointed Rustomjee Group, also known as Keystone Realtors, for the redevelopment and rehabilitation. Also Read: Mahindra Lifespaces to exit affordable housing by FY30, shifts focus to premium segment: CEO The entire area is spread across 11.20 acres. The redevelopment will generate 25,700 sq. m. of built-up space for MHADA as housing stock, with a permissible Floor Space Index (FSI) of 4.5, including the fungible area. The project has a total of 1,200 refugee families and 200 slum dwellers who will be rehabilitated as part of the project. 5) What will MHADA get in exchange? According to MHADA, a floor space index (FSI) of 4.5 will be available, including fungible area, ensuring each eligible family receives a free home measuring 635 sq ft. Also Read: Mumbai real estate: Redevelopment is here to stay for more than 20 years, says Boman Irani of Keystone Realtors In exchange, MHADA will receive 25,700 square meters of built-up space as housing stock. The MHADA will sell the housing stock from the same in the open market.
&w=3840&q=100)
First Post
an hour ago
- First Post
European firms in panic over EU's AI Act, 44 CEOs urge Brussels to pause the law
Over 40 CEOs of European companies wrote a letter to the EU urging Brussels to halt its landmark artificial intelligence act, The EU was already considering mellowing down key elements of the law due to come into force in August. read more The Chief Executives of top European companies, including Airbus and BNP Paribas, are urging the European Union (EU) to halt its landmark legislation regulating Artificial Intelligence (AI). The letter is coming at a time when the regional body is already considering watering down some of the key elements of the law. It is pertinent to note that the legislation is due to come into effect in August. In an open letter obtained by the Financial Times, the heads of 44 major firms on the continent called on European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen to introduce a two-year pause on the Act. The CEOs warned that some of the regulations are unclear and overlapping and can threaten the bloc's competitiveness in the global AI race. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD The letter noted that the EU's complex rules put 'Europe's AI ambitions at risk, as it jeopardises not only the development of European champions, but also the ability of all industries to deploy AI at the scale required by global competition.' According to The Financial Times, co-signatories also included the chiefs of French retailer Carrefour and Dutch healthcare group Philips. EU facing pressure The regional bloc has been facing intense pressure from the US government and Big Tech, as well as European groups, over its AI Act. With the passing of the act earlier this year, the group was considered the world's strictest regime regulating the development of fast-developing technology. In light of this, Brussels held a crunch meeting with big US tech groups on Wednesday to discuss a new, softened draft of its regulations. The current debate revolves around the drafting of a 'code of practice', which will guide AI companies on how to implement the act that applies to powerful AI models such as Google's Gemini, Meta's Llama and OpenAI's GPT-4. However, Brussels has already delayed publishing the code, which was due in May and is now expected to water down the rules. The EU's tech chief, Henna Virkkunen, on Monday said Brussels is finalising the code of practice ahead of the August deadline. 'We will publish the code of practice before that to support our industry and SMEs to comply with our AI Act'. 'This is a classic example of regulitis that doesn't take into account the most important thing for industry, which is legal certainty', said Patrick Van Eecke, co-chair of law firm Cooley's global cyber, data and privacy practice. According to The Financial Times, the letter from CEOs was organised by the EU AI Champions Initiative — a body representing 110 companies on the continent across industries — said a postponement would send 'innovators and investors around the world a strong signal that Europe is serious about its simplification and competitiveness agenda.' STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Meanwhile, there is also a separate joint letter signed by more than 30 European AI start-up founders and investors this week, which called the legislation 'a rushed ticking time bomb'. Hence, it will be interesting to see how the EU will respond to the letter.
Indian Express
4 hours ago
- Indian Express
When labour reform doesn't translate to labour rights
Written by Ujjwal Bhardwaj and Mrinalini Naik Recently, the National Platform for Domestic Workers (NPDW) reiterated its long-standing demand for a comprehensive national legislation to protect over 3 crore domestic workers across India. In the last few months, hundreds of Zepto workers in Hyderabad and Blinkit gig workers in Varanasi went on strike against arbitrary pay cuts and exploitative working conditions. Across the country, India's invisible labour force comprising domestic, gig, construction, sanitation, and agricultural labour is increasingly becoming vocal. But is the law listening? The 2019–20 labour codes were projected as a major reform, aimed at consolidating and streamlining India's labour laws. Yet, five years later, their silence on the unorganised sector is deafening. Of India's estimated 600 million workers, over 90 per cent work in the informal sector, without contracts, social security, or right to unionise. Despite the rhetoric of inclusivity, these codes bypass those who need protection the most. In 2008, the Unorganised Workers' Social Security Act was enacted to enable welfare schemes for such workers. However, the Act was limited in scope as it remained silent on key issues like minimum wage, working conditions, and unequal pay, and did not place binding obligations on the government. Worse, it required unorganised workers to furnish an 'employment certificate' to avail any benefit. This law was eventually subsumed into the Code on Social Security, 2020. Although the Code on Social Security, 2020, looks like inclusion, its design is exclusionary. While it theoretically extends coverage to gig and platform workers, it does not explicitly include several major categories of workers such as agricultural labourers, domestic workers, street vendors and shop-floor workers, thereby leaving them in a legal vacuum . Moreover, registration of workers under Section 113 of the Code remains voluntary and patchy. The burden of self-registration and self-verification on the e-Shram portal, imposed on workers who are already marginalised and digitally illiterate, reflects a top-down approach that fails to read the ground realities. The Code provides for the establishment of unorganised workers' welfare boards at national and state levels; however, these aren't fully operational yet. Only a few states have created welfare boards but most remain underfunded and underutilised. Kerala alone has a comparatively functional model, with dedicated boards for informal sectors and a tripartite funding structure. Earlier this year, the Supreme Court in the case of Ajay Malik vs State of Uttarakhand directed the Centre to enact a law to protect the rights of domestic workers. These workers, primarily women from Dalit and Adivasi communities, face a precarious situation. The absence of employer-employee recognition and exclusion of private households from the definition of 'establishment' under new labour laws leaves them under-protected. They are excluded from benefits like ESI, PF, and maternity leave. Neither do the new labour codes offer redress for sexual harassment. Although the Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013 (POSH Act) provides for local complaints committees for the unorganised sector, most districts have failed to constitute them, and enforcement remains almost non-existent. Agricultural workers, who form the backbone of India's rural economy are also left out. None of the four labour codes directly apply to the farm sector, despite the chronic wage exploitation, and high rates of indebtedness. Existing welfare schemes like PM-KISAN predominantly target agricultural landowners, leaving landless labourers with public distribution benefits, rather than robust wage or social security protections. Workers in retail outlets and repair shops face a similar predicament. While they fall under the ambit of the Code on Wages, 2019, enforcement is inadequate. This is due to a lack of shop registration, fear of job loss among workers if they report violations, and inadequate inspection machinery. The threshold-based applicability of the new labour codes further undermines their reach. Many provisions apply only to establishments employing 10, 20 or more workers, effectively excluding the lakhs of small shops and informal units where most unorganised employment is concentrated. India currently does not have a unified, binding legal regime to protect informal workers across sectors. Moreover, the laws treat such workers as recipients of welfare rather than holders of enforceable rights. Constitutional commitments under Articles 21, 39(e), 41 and 43 demand a rights-based approach to employment security and livelihood dignity. A central statute similar to the Rajasthan Platform-based Gig Workers (Welfare) Act, 2023, mandating worker registration and creation of welfare funds, applicable to all informal workers, is now required. Additionally, the long-pending National Policy for Domestic Workers, in circulation since 2011 and still in draft form, needs to be passed. Creating a single digital social security ID (Portable Smart Identification Cards), linked to Aadhaar and e-Shram, ensuring seamless portability across jobs, states, and employment types can be beneficial for the workers. The National Welfare Board and all state boards should be operationalised at the earliest. Appropriate funding and empowering the boards with proper tripartite representation (Workers' Representative, Employers and Government) and decision-making powers is needed. There should also be a robust Grievance Redressal Mechanism for all informal workers. Local Labour Ombudsmen at the ward or district level, empowered to adjudicate disputes, ensure fair wage practices, and enforce sexual harassment protections, especially in private homes and unregistered workplaces, can provide meaningful protection. India also needs to ratify ILO Conventions 189 and 184. These conventions on domestic work and agricultural safety standards will align India's framework with global rights-based norms. India's labour laws must not be tools of economic abstraction. They must reflect the real, lived experiences of those who build our cities, grow our food, clean our homes, and power our platforms. Unless the missing majority is placed at the centre of policy, labour reform will remain reform in name alone. The writers are advocates in the Supreme Court
