When the Prime Minister's Office (PMO) intervenes to clear a controversial hotel project, it calls for a gala party. Indeed, on December 29 last year, when the Union Cabinet - following a note from the PMO - granted clearance to the Radisson Hotel project near Delhi's Indira Gandhi International Airport, the problems that had plagued the venture since its inception in 1990 were solved in one stroke.And the promoters, including a Singapore-based NRI and some influential Delhi-based businessmen, celebrated the occasion with a host of wealthy hoteliers and power-brokers like controversial god-man Chandraswami.The Government's move, expectedly, has shocked many. After all, the Rs 300 crore, 275-room "5-star" hotel - which has come up on land belonging to the Airports Authority of India (AAI), adjacent to the Delhi-Jaipur highway - was yet to be granted basic no-objection certificates for power, water, sewer lines and fire-safety by the local civic and planning bodies of Delhi. What has made the Radisson project controversial is the tussle between the Delhi Development Authority (DDA) and the AAI over its clearance. In September 1995, the DDA had objected to the hotel saying it violated the city's master plan. The AAI, however, contended that the project, though initially cleared by it as a motel for transit passengers, was very much a part of its operational area.In November last year, the AAI referred the matter to the Law Ministry which took a stand that the operational area could not be viewed as part of the DDA's development area. Also, it decided that municipal authorities would not have any jurisdiction over the structure as it was on AAI land. Clearly, the reasoning of the ministry was without precedence..preferred-source-banner{ margin-top: 10px; margin-bottom:10px;}In early December, the matter was placed before a committee of secretaries, drawn from the ministries of civil aviation, transport and tourism. But before this committee could decide on the matter, the PMO ASHOK VAHIE stepped in and the Cabinet cleared the hotel on December 29. Sources say that the Cabinet's reasoning was that scrapping the project, or demolishing the five-storeyed structure, at this stage would send the wrong signals to foreign investors. Further, the Cabinet was of the view that interference of civic bodies was redundant since the AAI, which has similar tracts of land in other cities, was competent enough to decide on the land-use. As DDA Vice-Chairman P.K. Ghosh says, "Now, the whole matter is out of the DDA's purview."While it is perhaps the first time that the PMO has stepped in to clear a hotel, why the highest office of the executive acted like a realtor's firm to revive a stranded project remains a mystery.However, the haste in clearing the hotel is seen as a brazen attempt to please NRI businessmen and the hotel lobby before the elections. Moreover, civic authorities point out that the clearance to the Radisson hotel would set a precedent for the AAI to use the vast lands at its disposal all over the country in whatever manner it liked - in effect, the AAI would act like a parallel civic body. Sethi says the Government has lowered its stature by condoning lapses. Until its clearance, the disputes relating to the hotel - part of the Radisson chain of the US - were being examined by three independent committees. While a committee set up by the Delhi Government and headed by BJP MLA Poornima Sethi was looking into the "irregularities" associated with the hotel, a parliamentary committee chaired by BJP MP S.S. Bhandari and a committee of Union secretaries was also following the case.The Union Cabinet's nod for Radisson has, however, come with a rider: it is subject to clearance from the Delhi Urban Arts Commission (DUAC), a statutory body. But the AAI, which put up the hotel proposal in the first place and later fought tooth and nail with the local authorities to clear the project, is confident that the DUAC's clearance is a mere formality.Says AAI Chairman Ranjan Chatterjee: "We have adhered to our plans, applicable in operational areas. We had felt and assessed the need for a hotel basically to cater to airline passengers. So there's nothing wrong with the project, especially since the Law Ministry felt the project was all right." Adds Eric P. Mall, the AAI's chief architect: "It is the AAI's business to decide what to have in the operational area."However, the Delhi Government and the local agencies disagree. Says an enraged Sethi: "Look at their audacity. First, they construct a hotel instead of a motel, and now they want the highway shifted to expand their parking lot. Do they expect the Delhi Government to dance to their tunes?" The Bhandari Committee was in possession of all the files relating to the case and after detecting several violations in the hotel, had categorically told Union Civil Aviation Minister CM. Ibrahim not to clear the project till the committee had submitted its findings. And Ibrahim's deputy, Jayanthi Natarajan, is livid at being blatantly bypassed. She had reportedly sought all files relating to the project but was surprised when in late December the files were sent to the PMO without her consent. When contacted, all she said was, "No comments".The Radisson hotel case dates back to 1988, when tenders were called for a motel-cum-shopping arcade. The proposal was mooted despite the fact that the public-sector Centaur Hotel, just a few kilometres away from Radisson, had less than 30 per cent occupancy even with transit passengers. The AAI floated the scheme ostensibly to protect its land from encroachment. On January 2, 1990, 21,350 sq m of land on the national highway was handed over for 30 years to AB Hotels, run by A.B. Batra of Batra Hospital fame. This followed an agreement for "setting up of a motel" on December 29, 1989.Construction began in August 1993 after the AAI approved the plans. The DDA, concerned at violations of the Delhi's Master Plan (2001), had been issuing notices since September 1995, by which time the basic structure was in place. The DDA was furious that the AAI did not seek its clearance to build a structure in a "development area". A series of meetings took place. But the promoters had already raised five storeys over a built-up area of about 30,000 sq m, violating a host of building bye-laws, the most glaring being that they had built a hotel instead of a motel. And, while approvals for building plans are always sought before construction begins, the promoters presented to the DDA plans for the completed structure in August 1996. In May 1997, the DDA worked out a penalty of Rs 1.98 crore for excess construction.Other violations include:Excess ground floor coverage of 327 sq m.Excess commercial space coverage of 3,968 sq m.No clearance under the Urban Land Ceiling and Regulation Act.No clearance yet from the DUAC. "We have adhered to our plans. There is nothing wrong with the project."Ranjan Chatterjee, Chairman, AAI The other point of dispute is that the structure was never meant for further commercial subletting. Sethi contends that a multinational cellular phone giant, which occupies two floors of the hotel, has been allowed 30 per cent - instead of the stipulated 5 per cent - covered area for its corporate office in the building. By allowing such "coarse irregularities, the Government has lowered its own stature", she says.Even though the AAI categorically denies it, the Sethi Committee alleges that because of its extra-height the hotel has forced incoming and outgoing aircraft into a different air funnel. The AAI, however, maintains that the hotel structure was cleared for 59 feet and since it has not exceeded that limit, air traffic remains undisturbed.Further, there were 25 objections pertaining to building bye-laws but in early 1997, the then lt-governor of Delhi P.K. Dave overruled them on instructions from the Centre. The basic issue of the Urban Development Ministry unilaterally changing land-use norms to accommodate a hotel on an agricultural belt was left unresolved. Little wonder then that in mid-1996, after having raised the structure close to the highway, when the hotel asked for a number of civic clearances from the DDA, the Delhi Municipal Corporation, the Delhi Vidyut Board and other agencies for water, fire-safety and electricity, permission was hard to come by. In fact, even as late as September 2, 1997, Robey Lal, AAI member (operations), was reminding the dda that approvals, pending for a long while, should be granted as the hotel's progress had been held up. Though Lal said in the letter that the project met the overall parameters of the AAI, the DDA's go-ahead never really came.Though it now has the Cabinet's go-ahead, thanks to the PMO's intervention, the powerful hotel group might still not find the sailing smooth. First of all, as a statutory body, the DUAC is not bound by the Cabinet's decision. Secondly, the hotel will find it difficult to get the requisite sanction for civic amenities if the Delhi Government and the local agencies decide to go strictly by the rules. The Gujral Government may have opened the gates for the Radisson Hotel, but the local BJP Government, given its mood, seems unwilling to provide room service.Published By: AtMigration Published On: Feb 9, 1998--- ENDS ---
