Part-2: Where is the Sports Infra in 'Sports City'

Part-2: Sports City Scam www.infralive.com 34 InfraLIVE November 15, 2022 Vidhur Bharadwaj, Supreet Singh Suri and Nirmal Singh. During Mayawati's tenure as the Chief Mi n i s t e r o f U t t a r P r a d e s h (13.5.2007 to 14.3.2012), the Noida Authority awarded nine major large plots aggregating more than 300 acres costing about Rs 3,491 crore. While doing so, the Noida Authority overlooked their meagre net-worth and lack of experience in real estate construction and devel- opment activities. Three C Group has not yet paid significant dues of land premium/ cost of plot No. SC-01/78 & 79. As of March 31, 2020, Three C Group had overall outstanding dues of Rs 4,694 crores in its Sports City/ Commercial builder plots inNoida. Three C Group Companies under InsolvencyProceedings Several Three C Group compa- nies namely Three C Green Devel- opers Pvt Ltd (TCGDPL), the SPC of the Sports City Plot-SC-01/78 & 79 and allottee of plot of 166,459 sqm in Sector 79 and two plots of 48,525 sqm in Sector 101; Piyush IT Solutions Pvt Ltd - the sub-allottee of 28,000 sqm; Three C Universal Developers Pvt Ltd (TCUDPL), the Holding Company of the LeadMem- ber of the Consortium; Three C Homes Pvt Ltd; Three C Projects Pvt Ltd; Three C Shelter Pvt Ltd; and many sub-allottees like Kindle Developers Pvt Ltd, Arena Super- structures Pvt Ltd etc are under Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) under Insolvency andBankruptcy Code (IBC) 2016 as on date. Itmay take significant time to complete the resolution process in these cases. ModusOperandi of SPC The modus operandi of the Three CGreenDevelopers Pvt Ltd (DoI 30.10.2010), lessee of Plot No-SC- 01/C/79 (3,12,209 sqm) and the SPC of the consor- tium was very simple. They first acquired five sister concerns (table-5 below) by investing a meagre sumof Rs 1-2 lakh each in a company to obtain 100 per cent shares in those companies in June 2014. Thereafter they divided the sub-plots wi th the approva l of Noida Authority in September 2014 and allotted a sub-plot to each newly acquired subsidiaries in November 2014. After barely few months, the SPC sold/transferred the ownership of these 100 per cent owned subsidiaries to third parties. The balance land of 166,459 sqm remained with the SPC on which they got a development project registered with UP RERA in 2017. However, no progress has been done till date. The company had issued Non-Convertible Deben- tures for Rs 225 crore in 2014. As the company didn't pay back the instalments, the creditor has taken them to NCLT. The company is under CIRP/IBC since 2021. Thus, the SPC of the consortium has not completed a single sports infra project in last 11 years, the prime objective of the Scheme under which allotment of the plot of 174 acres of land at a highly subsidised pricewasmade to the consortium. RERA failed to detect limita- tions on 70 pc of Sports City plot, endangering the inter- ests ofHome-buyers Section 4 (2) (l) of the Real Estate ( Regulation and Develop- change in shareholding by taking advantage of the erroneous condi- tion included by Noida Authority. This resulted in plots valuing Rs 4,041 crore transferred to builders in 20 cases of sub-divisions. By waiving the transfer charges, Noida Authority has failed to recover transfer charges of Rs 296 crore at the rate of 10 per cent of the current rate of the land determined by the CAG. Further sub-leases were said to be done on the basis of cost sharing agreements between the compa- nies but copy of none of the cost sharing agreements was available in the file produced before CAG. As ownership of all the companies have changed, this should have been treated as transfer for which not only transfer charges should have been recovered by Authority bu t t he y a l s o s hou l d c l a im unearned increase in market value of land (ie difference between pre- mium paid and market value) as these plots appear to have been sold to other entities. There was, thus, a loss of Rs 296 crore to Noida Authority in the instant case on account of permit- ting transfers without imposition of transfer charges. In its reply, Noida Authority accepted (September 2020) the CAG's observation and stated that provisions regarding subsidiary company should have been made mandatory in the brochure in such a way that the constitution of sub- sidiary company does not change. In view of the audit observation, action was being taken for recovery of transfer charges. Hu g e ou t s t and i n g du e s against ThreeCgroup Three C Group is promoted by Table-5 Sub-Plot No. Area (Sqm) DoI Acquired on Sub- leased Sold on Three C Infra Creations Pvt Ltd SC-01/C4 24,000 04.01.2011 25.06.2014 Nov 2014 06.04.2015 Three C City Developers Pvt Ltd SC-01/C5 20,000 30.12.2010 25.06.2014 Nov 2014 06.04.2015 Three C Builders Pvt Ltd SC-01/C7&C8 41,750 13.07.2010 25.06.2014 Nov 2014 06.04.2015 Water e-Pearl Infosoftech Pvt Ltd SC-01/C6 24,000 12.09.2008 25.06.2014 Nov 2014 22.01.2015 Piyush IT Solutions Pvt Ltd SC-01/C3 28,000 22.06.2011 27.06.2014 18.11.2014 15.03.2017