Action Taken Reports in respect of minutes of the 1886th meeting held on 27.08.2026.

1. Action Taken Reports in respect of minutes of the 1886th meeting held on 27.08.2026 were discussed.

1. The North-DMC forwarded (through OPAAS) the proposal for consideration by the Commission.
2. No previous record of approval (Formal/Completion) taken has been found in the available record of the Commission.
3. The building proposal for residential building (B+S+G+03) received (through OPAAS) at the formal stage was scrutinised. Based on the submission made, including drawings and photographs, etc., the following observations are to be complied with:

a) The Commission, upon comparing the actual site photographs provided in the project report with the proposal submitted for Formal Stage approval, observed that the proposal appears to involve demolition and reconstruction of the existing structure.

b) The Commission observed that the proposal is being reviewed and evaluated with due consideration to its visual quality, urban aesthetics, architectural expression, and compatibility with the surrounding context.

c) As the building is situated within a densely developed area, where the proposed development may have implications for the surrounding buildings, the concerned local body shall ensure the structural safety of the building and its surroundings.

d) 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.

e) The provisions for road widening shall be addressed by the concerned local body in accordance with prevailing UBBL norms, regulations, and applicable statutory provisions.

f) All plumbing pipes, rainwater pipes, discharge from the balconies, service equipment, water tanks, air-conditioning units, solar panels, drying of clothes 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 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 accept the concept of the building plan proposal for additions/alterations at its meeting held on November 10, 2022, March 16, 2023, and October 04, 2023, respectively, specific observations were given.
3. The Commission did not approve the building plans proposal for additions/alterations at its meeting held on February 23, 2023, May 04, 2023, July 13, 2023, July 27, 2023, and August 17, 2023, respectively, specific observations were given.
4. The Commission accepted the Concept of the Building plan proposal for addition/alterations at its meeting held on April 06, 2023, specific observations were given.
5. The Commission approved the building plans proposal for addition/alteration at its meeting held on December 21, 2023; specific observations were given.
6. The Commission did not accept the part NOC for Completion plans proposal received at completion stage at its meeting held on August 13, 2026; specific observations were given.
7. The proposal for part NOC for Completion (comprising of newly constructed multipurpose hall, banquet hall) received (through email) at the Completion stage was scrutinized.  The Commission noted that the roofing material of the newly constructed multi-purpose hall differs from that approved by the Commission at the Formal Stage. The Commission, while considering the Part NOC for Completion, reviewed the proposal with due regard to its visual quality, urban aesthetics, architectural expression, and compatibility with the surrounding existing structures at site. Based on the submission, including the Completion drawings, supporting drawings/documentation and site photographs submitted, the proposal for NOC for Part Completion (comprising of newly constructed multipurpose hall, banquet hall) is accepted.

1. The North-DMC forwarded (through email) 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, May 19, 2026 and July 7, 2026; specific observations were given.
3. The Commission accepted the concept of the building plan proposal for residential building at its meeting held on August 20, 2026, specific observations were given.
4. The building plans proposal for residential building (S + G + three floors) received (through email) at the formal stage was scrutinised along with the conceptually suitable letter no: OL-03082627036 dated 31.08.2026. Based on the submission made, including project report, drawings, photographs, and previous observations of the Commission at conceptual stage etc., the following observations are to be complied with:

a) The Commission observed that the proposal is being reviewed and evaluated with due consideration to its visual quality, urban aesthetics, architectural expression, and compatibility with the surrounding context.

b) The Commission observed that the proposal has been resubmitted without satisfactorily addressing the previous observations and without providing a point-wise response to the observations conveyed vide conceptual stage observation letter no. OL-03082627036 dated 31.08.2026, which was not appreciated. It shall be ensured that any revised/resubmitted proposal is accompanied by a comprehensive point-wise response to all observations of the Commission, with corresponding revisions duly incorporated in the proposal and all requisite supporting documents submitted, so as to ensure completeness and facilitate effective examination by the Commission.

c) Further, while reviewing the proposal at the conceptual stage at its meeting held on August 20, 2026, the architect was specifically suggested for the following:

“.......The Architect was advised to incorporate, wherever appropriate, architectural elements consistent with those existing on the façade, particularly above the doors at the first-floor level, to maintain continuity and coherence in the overall architectural expression....”

The proposed façade details in the revised Formal Stage submission do not adequately convey the requisite architectural elements consistent with those existing on the façade, which is not appreciated.

d) Further, discrepancies have been observed in the submission, wherein the revised 3D views do not correspond with the proposed plans & elevations. It shall be ensured that all drawings, including plans, elevations, sections and 3D views, are duly coordinated and consistent with one another and accurately reflect the proposed development, thereby maintaining coherence and consistency throughout the complete set of submission drawings.

e) All plumbing pipes, rainwater pipes, service equipment, water tanks, air-conditioning units, solar panels, drying of clothes 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.

5. Overall, in view of the discrepancies observed in the Formal Stage submission and the non-compliance with the previous observations of the Commission communicated vide Conceptual Stage Observation Letter No. OL-03082627036 dated 31.08.2026, the proposal is hereby returned to the local body with the suggestion that the architect duly address and incorporate all the above observations and submit a comprehensive point-wise compliance and response for further consideration by the Commission.

1. The South-DMC forwarded (through OPAAS) the proposal for consideration by the Commission.
2. No previous record of approval (Formal/Completion) taken has been found in the available record of the Commission.
3. The building proposal for residential building (comprising of basement + ground + 3 floors) received (through OPAAS) at the formal stage was scrutinised. Based on the submission made, including drawings and photographs, etc., the following observations are to be complied with:

a) The Commission, upon comparing the actual site photographs provided in the project report with the proposal submitted for Formal Stage approval, observed that the proposal appears to involve demolition and reconstruction of the existing structure.

b) The Commission observed that the proposal is being reviewed and evaluated with due consideration to its visual quality, urban aesthetics, architectural expression, and compatibility with the surrounding context. The building proposal has been examined with respect to its elevation, façade treatment, materiality, built form, and screening of utilities. The internal planning and functional aspects, including safety and security provisions, shall be verified by the concerned local authority to ensure compliance with the applicable provisions of the Unified Building Bye-Laws (UBBL).

c) As the building is situated within a densely developed area, where the proposed development may have implications for the surrounding buildings, the concerned local body shall ensure the structural safety of the building and its surroundings.

d) 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.

e) The provisions for road widening shall be addressed by the concerned local body in accordance with prevailing UBBL norms, regulations, and applicable statutory provisions.

f) All plumbing pipes, rainwater pipes, discharge from the balconies, service equipment, water tanks, air-conditioning units, solar panels, drying of clothes 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 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 approved the layout and building plans proposal at its April 29, 1999, meeting and subsequently accepted the NOC for completion at its May 26, 2005, meeting.
3. The building plans proposal for additions and alterations (extension of existing drawing room, existing bedroom, provision of additional toilet, store, and addition/extension of balconies) 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 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 Commission observed that the proposal is being reviewed and evaluated with due consideration to its visual quality, urban aesthetics, architectural expression, and compatibility with the surrounding context. The building proposal has been examined with respect to its elevation, façade treatment, materiality, built form, and screening of utilities. The internal planning and functional aspects, including safety and security provisions, shall be verified by the concerned local authority to ensure compliance with the applicable provisions of the Unified Building Bye-Laws (UBBL).

c) The proposal is for the additions/alterations to the existing building received NOC for completion in the year 2005, resulting in an additional structural load on the existing framework, the local body shall ensure the structural safety and stability of the entire structure and proposed additions/alterations in accordance with the applicable codes and regulations.

d) The extensive use of temporary materials to cover balconies across the entire complex has been observed, detracting from both the visual appeal and urban aesthetics. These coverings shall be removed, and shall be checked at the time of receiving proposal at NOC for Completion stage.

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, drying of clothes 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 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 CPWD forwarded (through OPAAS) the proposal for consideration by the Commission.
2. Earlier, the Commission approved the master plan (AIIMS) at its meeting held on 10-July-2013.
3. The Commission did not approve the building plans proposal (construction of Critical care & Infectious Diseases Block, and MLCP Block) received at formal stage at its meeting held on September 12, 2024, specific observations were given.
4. The building plans proposal (construction of Critical care & Infectious Diseases Block, and MLCP Block) 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-09092462016 dated 19.09.2024.  Based on the submission made, including drawings, photographs and replies submitted, etc., the following observations are to be complied with:

a) The Commission observed that the proposal is being reviewed and evaluated with due consideration to its visual quality, urban aesthetics, architectural expression, and compatibility with the surrounding context. The building proposal has been examined with respect to its elevation, façade treatment, materiality, built form, and screening of utilities. The internal planning and functional aspects, including safety and security provisions, shall be verified by the concerned local authority to ensure compliance with the applicable provisions of the Unified Building Bye-Laws (UBBL).

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.

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 email) the proposal for consideration by the Commission.
2. The proposal was deferred.

1. The North-DMC forwarded (through OPAAS) the proposal for consideration by the Commission.
2. No previous record of approval (Formal/Completion) taken has been found in the available record of the Commission.
3. The building proposal for building received (through OPAAS) at the formal stage was scrutinised. Based on the submission made, including drawings and photographs, etc., the following observations are to be complied with:

a) The Commission, upon comparing the actual site photographs provided in the project report with the proposal submitted for Formal Stage approval, observed that the proposal appears to involve demolition and reconstruction of the existing structure.

b) The Commission observed that the proposal is being reviewed and evaluated with due consideration to its visual quality, urban aesthetics, architectural expression, and compatibility with the surrounding context. The building proposal has been examined with respect to its elevation, façade treatment, materiality, built form, and screening of utilities. The internal planning and functional aspects, including safety and security provisions, shall be verified by the concerned local authority to ensure compliance with the applicable provisions of the Unified Building Bye-Laws (UBBL).

c) The Commission observed that the matter regarding “Mandatory Submission of Complete Details of Owner and Architect for Consideration of Proposals by the Commission” was considered by the Commission at its meeting held on 18.06.2026, and available on DUAC Web-site vide memorandum no: 1(2)/1982-DUAC dated 01.07.2026, wherein it was specifically stipulated 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...”

It was observed that the owner’s credentials provided in the submission are incomplete/incorrect, as the contact number indicated as 1234567890 is not acceptable. Since the proposal is being submitted at the Formal Stage, it shall be ensured that the revised submission contains correct, complete and updated documentation, including the requisite details and credentials of the owner and architect. The necessary corrections shall be made and the revised proposal resubmitted for consideration.

d) Further, discrepancies have been observed in the submission, wherein the 3D views do not correspond with the proposed elevations. It shall be ensured that all drawings, including plans, elevations, sections and 3D views, are duly coordinated and consistent with one another and accurately reflect the proposed development, thereby maintaining coherence and consistency throughout the complete set of submission drawings.

e) It was observed that though the proposed site is accessed form rear and sides also but only the front elevations has been submitted rendering the proposal at formal stage as incomplete. It shall be ensured that the proposal shall submit all side elevations for the review of the Commission.

f) The proposed balconies shall have adequate provisions for the rain water discharge, which is found to be missing in the submission, it shall be ensured that all pipes shall remain screened and appropriate provisions shall be reflected in the revised submission for the review.

g) All plumbing pipes, rainwater pipes, service equipment, water tanks, air-conditioning units, solar panels, drying of clothes 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, in view of the discrepancies and lack of clarity observed in the Formal Stage submission, the proposal is hereby returned to the local body with the suggestion that the architect duly address and incorporate all the above observations and submit a comprehensive point-wise compliance and response for further consideration by the Commission.

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 Commission did not accept the NOC for completion plans proposal at its meeting August 6, 2026; specific observations were given.
5. 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 along with the replies submitted to the previous observations of the Commission communicated vide DUAC letter no: OL-03082650008 dated 18.08.2026.  The Local body is advised that utilities (including outdoor air-conditioning units) and clothes drying in balconies shall remain screened to maintain the intended architectural character of buildings. Based on the submission, including the drawings, supporting documents, site photographs, and replies submitted, the proposal for the NOC for Completion (PKG IXB, Type VI Quarters, Tower 13 to 20 (Phase I), is accepted.