http://www.expressindia.com/latest-news/Deal-lands-GMADA-in-Rs-119-crore-loss/330670/
Deal lands GMADA in Rs 119 crore loss
Font Size -
-A +A
Nitin Jain
Posted online: Thursday , July 03, 2008 at 12:53:12
Updated: Thursday , July 03, 2008 at 12:53:12
Print Email To Editor Post Comments
Mohali, July 02 Heavy losses do not seem to perturb the Greater Mohali Area Development Authority (GMADA) when it comes to currying favour with certain influential institutions in Mohali.
And each time history repeats itself, the price goes up. GMADA’s latest loss amounts to Rs 118.91 crore — a result of exchanging 34 acres of prime land in Sector 76, Mohali, with the Radha Soami Satsang Beas (RSSB). Earlier, GMADA had suffered a loss of Rs 3.05 crore by allotting 1.44 acres in Sector 69, Mohali, to the Army Institute of Law.
The history
Last month, the GMADA had decided in-principle to regularise the 34 acres of its land encroached by the RSSB on the northern side of Sector 76. In return, the RSSB was willing to surrender 34 acres from its allotted 200 acres on the southern side and hand over 1.72 acres in Phase VII to GMADA as well.
The RSSB had first come up with the land-exchange offer on September 13, 2007 and met Punjab Chief Minister Parkash Singh Badal. The CM had forwarded the matter to the GMADA chief administrator, who had constituted a high-level committee to consider the offer. The committee comprised the additional chief administrator, land acquisition collector, estate officer, chief town planner, district town planner and divisional engineer (estate).
The calculations
In its report, the panel submitted that 34.2 acres of GMADA land on northern side of Sector 76, which was under the illegal possession of RSSB, was meant for residential use according to the Mohali Master Plan. An equal pocket of RSSB land on the southern side, included in the RSSB land-exchange offer, was meant for institutional use. The 1.72-acre RSSB land in Phase VII, also on offer, was meant for public buildings as defined in the Master Plan.
In view of the RSSB proposal, the GMADA committee worked out a cost-benefit analysis based on the existing land use of both these land pockets, the existing reserve price and the expected market price.
The hitch
The report pointed to a deficit of Rs 118.91 crore for GMADA. According to the committee’s calculations, the net worth of the GMADA land was estimated at Rs 227.6 crore, while the RSSB land worked out to be Rs 102.03 crore. The 1.72 acres in Phase VII were valued at Rs 6.66 crore.
To make the proposal viable, the committee recommended that RSSB pay the difference as compensation to GMADA.
Moreover, the chief town planner (in a note to GMADA chief administrator on September 20, 2007) pointed out that the RSSB land had a 220 KV high-tension electricity line passing through the site, making it unviable for optimal utilisation. Also, the GMADA land was more valuable as it was marked for residential use. He added that the RSSB land was located far away from the existing developed residential sectors and those proposed for institutional purposes as well.
The decision
Placing the matter before CM Badal, the GMADA administration made it clear that acceptance of the offer would entail change of land-use of the RSSB area for residential purposes. The Phase VII plot would also have to be converted for commercial purposes. For this, approval from the Punjab Regional Town Planning Board is necessary. GMADA also pointed out that the high-tension electricity lines would have to be shifted and the cost incurred should be borne by the RSSB.
Also, the RSSB land was low lying and required massive earth filling to make it useful for residential purposes. In this too, GMADA proposed that RSSB should bear the cost. However, the CM directed that the matter be discussed in the third meeting of GMADA, which he chaired last month. Accepting the RSSB offer with scant thought to the heavy losses, GMADA has just asked the RSSB to bear the cost of shifting of the high-tension electricity lines from the land.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment