Noida Sec 105 residents flag ‘wrongly served’ labour cess notices

Noida: Several Sector 105 residents allege receiving Labour Department cess notices despite prior payments by original owners

Noida: Several residents of Noida’s Sector 105 have alleged to have received the Labour Department’s notices demanding cess even after it was already paid by original house owners or should have been served about a decade ago or much earlier.

According to the Sector 105 RWA, around 800 of the 1,044 houses have received the cess notices in mid-September. (HT Archive)

According to the Sector 105 RWA, around 800 of the 1,044 houses have received the cess notices in mid-September.

Labour department officials acknowledged that there has been a delay in serving such notices which are actually based on a 2017 survey.

After the notices were also sent to homeowners, who purchased properties through resale, locals have raised questions about the verification process and coordination between departments.

Generally, the labour cess notice addresses the original house owner. Those having purchased flats in resale are not supposed to pay for it, as it is part of the original construction cost.

“This step of sending notices to even those who have already paid their dues is completely wrong. I wrote to the district administration once over a month ago and once as recent as about four days ago. Even elderly citizens, who have already paid their dues, have been sent notices. The department appears to have relied on a 2017-18 survey without any on-ground verification. Construction costs are being inflated, and heavy interest and penalties are being imposed,” said Deepak Sharma, president of the Sector 105 RWA citing the case of his 60-year-old brother who received a notice.

One such notice, dated August 10 and reviewed by HT, cited a Geographic Information System (GIS) survey conducted by the Uttar Pradesh Building and Other Construction Workers Welfare Board in Gautam Budh Nagar district in 2017-18. It stated that the estimated construction cost of a building had been assessed at ₹10,468,093, against which 1% cess amounting to ₹104,680.94 was payable.

The notice wans that failure to pay the cess could attract 2% monthly interest.

HT also accessed letters written by residents to the Labour Department in response to the notices. In these communications, residents claimed that they had already paid the applicable dues but still received fresh demand to pay it.

RWA president Sharma alleged that some families, who purchased their houses through resale recently are being burdened with liabilities dating back several years.

This is despite them having completed their purchases after obtaining valid clearances, including the lease deed and completion certificate (CC) from the Noida authority, he added.

Vipin Kumar Jain, a resident of Sector 105, said, “I moved here in 2022. The house was already built when I bought it from a previous owner, who told me that all dues had been paid. Yet, we received a notice demanding ₹95,000. We plan to take up the matter with the labour commissioner.”

Cess calculated at 1% of the total construction cost

According to officials, under earlier regulations, labour cess was applicable to residential houses built before 2021 if the construction cost was ₹10 lakh or more. For commercial properties, the cess applied irrespective of the construction cost.

The cess is calculated at 1% of the total construction cost, officials said.

Rakesh Dwivedi, additional labour commissioner, said the notices were not specifically targeted at Sector 105 but they were based on a 2017 survey conducted across Gautam Budh Nagar district.

“I am willing to accept that there has been a delay. It would indeed have been better if this had been resolved sooner. However, we are not demanding any interest or imposing any penalties. We are simply asking for the cess applicable to the specific year. For instance, if a building plan was approved in 2017, we are seeking the payment corresponding to the survey conducted in 2017,” he said.

Dwivedi, however, denied to have personally received any complaint related to it.