Lda Announces Help Desk For De Sealing Of Compliant Coaching Centres

HT CorrespondentThe Lucknow Development Authority (LDA) has announced a dedicated help desk for owners of sealed coaching institutes and commercial establishments, offering them an opportunity to secure de-sealing within 24 to 72 hours, if they prove compliance with prescribed building and fire safety norms.The decision emerged as the key takeaway from a city-wide fire and electrical safety workshop organised by the LDA for school and coaching institute operators at Indira Gandhi Pratishthan on Saturday. The initiative forms part of the authority’s intensified enforcement drive following recent fire safety concerns in commercial buildings across the city.LDA secretary Vivek Srivastava said the authority will set up the help desk at the LDA committee hall from June 29. Owners and managers of sealed premises can submit sanctioned building plans, fire safety certificates and other relevant documents for verification. Officials will examine each case within 24 to 72 hours and revoke sealing orders wherever institutions comply with mandatory safety standards.During the workshop, officials from the LDA, fire department, electrical safety department, education department and district administration directed institutions to immediately audit their electrical infrastructure, ensure standard-quality wiring and eliminate overloaded circuits to reduce fire risks.They also asked schools and coaching centres to educate students about emergency evacuation procedures and fire safety practices.Authorities stressed that emergency exits must remain obstruction-free, firefighting equipment should be installed at designated locations and maintained regularly and every residential and commercial building must submit a notarised affidavit confirming compliance with fire safety norms. Officials warned that violations would invite strict legal action.Several coaching operators claimed their institutes had been sealed despite meeting safety requirements, while others argued that building owners —not tenants — should bear responsibility for structural compliance. Rejecting the argument, officials maintained that institution operators remain accountable for the safety of students and staff regardless of tenancy arrangements.