Farm Houses in Noida

Farm Houses in Noida www.infralive.com 25 InfraLIVE September 15, 2022 positive report despite vari- ous apparent deficiencies in the application forms submit- ted but PAC failed to analyse the report submitted by the consultant. All the submitted reports were undated, thereby the submission dates could not be verified in audit. Thus, therewas complete lack of due diligence on the part of UPICOaswell as PAC. ¦ The minutes of the meeting of PAC headed by OSD did not show the date of interview of individual applicants and the same was also not available on record. Thus, how many applicants were interviewed on a given date could not be ascertained in audit. The applications were rejected on the ground that the commit- tee was not satisfied with the presentation, submitted docu- ments etc without specifically mentioning the deficiencies noticed. This clearly shows the discretionary nature of allotmentsmade by PAC. ¦ As per scheme guidelines, initially the preliminary screening of the registered applicant was to be done by a sub-committee comprising of three members - Manager (Institutional), Sanyukt Archi- tect, and Accounts Officer (Institutional) - but minutes of the sub-committee meetings were not available in any of the files/ records. Thus, PAC had vast discretion as objective criteriawere not laid down and detailed analysis forming the basis of recommendations was not in evidence. ¦ In 30 cases, net worth of the applicant was not sufficient, in 34 cases the proposed activi- ties at Farm Houses were of commercial nature, in 11 cases either the company was incor- porated for less than three years (10 cases) or audited accounts were not submitted (one case), in 27 cases land use pattern, construction plan and schedule of implementation was not submitted and in 32 cases sources of finance for implementation of the project was not sufficient. However, without considering these deficiencies allotments were made. AllocationofMultiplePlots Many promoters applied through their different front/ shadow com- panies/ directors and have cornered many plots of farm houses in the prime sectors of Noida at throw- away prices. The CAG has stated that in many cases, multiple allot- ments to applicants on a single date were given and front companies were used for allotment of plots through different applications. A list of companies / individual, which were allocated multiple plots, is given at table-4 at pg 26. There is evidence of dereliction of duty by the members of the PAC whereby fraudulent actions have been per- mitted by the officials of NOIDA Authority. But, in the case of Brijanand Secu- rities Pvt Ltd, which had submitted two applications, the PAC rejected one application on the ground that they had submitted two applica- tions. However, same level of dili- gencewas not shown in other cases. table-2 at pg 25). The allotments were made in different sectors (see table-3 at pg 25). Out of 157 allotments, 54 allot- ments were selected by CAG for detailed audit scrutiny through random sampling method. Of which, three files were not submit- ted during Audit. Based on the test check, the CAGobserved: ¦ PAC did not have any objec- tive and transparent criteria for assessing the applications received. They adjudged the application, without detailing the basis of their judgement. Such a practice left a lot of scope for use of discretion by PAC. The detailed scrutiny of the documents submitted along with the application forms in 51 test-checked cases showed that in 47 cases there were deficiencies in compli- ance of scheme guidelines, eligibility criteria and mini- mumnetworth required. ¦ In 11 cases even though UPICO gave negative report, PAC allotted the plot, disre- garding the recommendation of the consultant without placing a reasoned/ speaking written order on record. ¦ In 36 cases, UPICO submitted Table-3: Sector wise summary of allotted Farm House Plots Sector No. of Plots Farm House Numbering Additional Nos. Missing/ Unallocated Plots Nos. 126 4 FH-01 to 04 Nil Nil 127 9 FH-01 to 09 Nil Nil 128 39 FH-01 to 38 FH-10A & 12A FH-13 131 11 FH-01 to 11 Nil Nil 133 18 FH-01 to 18 Nil Nil 149A 5 FH-01 to 05 Nil Nil 162 10 FH-01 to 10 Nil Nil 164 39 FH-01 to 39 Nil Nil 165 28 FH-01 to 29 Nil FH-24 167 18 FH-01 to 21 Nil FH-4, 5 & 6 Total 181 Table-2: Details of Farm House Schemes (Source: CAG) Scheme Name Duration No. of Applicants No. of Allottees Area (in Sqm) From To OES-V (2008-09) 19.01.2009 12.04.2010 190 102 11,94,114 OES-2010 15.09.2010 03.05.2011 115 55 6,43,226 Total 305 157 18,37,340