Round and round: The many unanswered questions around the Vadra land deal in Shikohpur, Haryana
A towering crescendo of outrage had brought a hasty look-in. Then came reports that four district collectors in Haryana—of Gurgaon, Faridabad, Palwal and Mewat—had given a clean chit to the land deals struck with DLF since 2005 by Robert Vadra, the son-in-law of Congress chief Sonia Gandhi. But it appears these officials, who report to a committee of three headed by a senior state bureaucrat, gave a clean chit to only the value of the deals.
In fact, officials privy to the details told Outlook that they feel a series of permissions, mutations and changes in development plans need to be closely examined before Vadra’s dealings are cleared. In particular, they point to the permissions Vadra’s company Skylight Hospitality ostensibly got for the 3.5-acre plot of land it acquired in Shikohpur, ten kilometres from Gurgaon.
Documents seen by Outlook reveal that, till recently, the land did not have the required permission to be sold, leased or used for any other purpose (than for which it was sold to the buyer). In short, Vadra’s company could not by law sell the land (as it claims to have done in 2008) to DLF. Even the paperwork concerning the location of the plot deserves further probe, they feel.
As has been reported, the Shikohpur land’s sudden escalation in value came to light after India Against Corruption, an NGO run by Arvind Kejriwal, released documents to the public. Surrounded by upcoming residential townships and opposite an entertainment park, Skylight bought the plot for Rs 15 crore in March 2008. Skylight claims it resold it to DLF for Rs 58 crore—the deal was ostensibly struck within 65 days of acquiring the land. Another agreement was signed in September 2012 by both parties.
As per one set of official records of the state government for 2008, 2009 and 2010, the permission the Shikohpur plot had was a ‘CLU’, which makes farmland fit for commercial use. This ‘licence’, officials say, could not have been transferred. Nor could a plot with CLU have been sold, sub-let, sub-divided, broken into plots, or developed in any way other than the CLU was originally meant for.
In Skylight’s case, the permission is understood to have been for developing residential properties, though it is not yet known whose name exactly it was taken in. Subsequently, Skylight may indeed have decided to tie up with a builder such as DLF to develop homes—but would the company be permitted an outright sale, along with the licence? That’s something officials say can’t be done.
That may explain why the land was not transferred to DLF, even though it paid Rs 50 crore to Skylight. Concerns have been raised by auditors about the 3.5 acres not being passed on to DLF, to the detriment of the real estate giant and its shareholders. It also casts a shadow on DLF’s claim that it “agreed to buy the said plot, given its licensing status”.
Records confirm that Skylight got the CLU permission post haste—within 65 days after Vadra purchased the land from Onkareshwar Properties. In all, Vadra’s firm seems to do little more than operate as a middleman in the entire transaction, as the plot moved from farmer to builder. Even today it lies unused, save for a small, shabby building.
Officials say the plot, which boasts an excellent location on the highway to Jaipur, could have been transferred only by following due legal procedure.
To change land use, a new buyer must either seek permission from the DC—this has not been taken by Skylight. Alternately, he may purchase and re-register land, paying a fresh stamp duty.
The location of the plot—in an unconsolidated area—is worthy of examination. “Think of an unconsolidated area like an old ten-paisa coin with irregular sides. Its owners are scattered across the zone, each claiming different-sized portions, but no individual plots are demarcated,” says another official. Could Vadra’s connections have proved useful in ensuring he landed a plum highway location? Or, did Onkareshwar Properties’ Satyanand Yajee, a man said to be close to Haryana CM B.S. Hooda, already own land along the highway?
Officials do say that the two sectors—77 and 83—being carved out of Shikohpur saw repeated and persistent changes and alterations in their development plans, including the alignment of roads and highways. Once, between 2006 and 2008, it even boasted of a planned SEZ.
According to central government rules at the time, an SEZ project could not be split into two—it had to be ‘contiguous’. So, officials were put to the task of re-routing an under-construction road that would otherwise have split the proposed SEZ. Later, it turned out that if the road was built according to the original plan, it would have taken over most of the plot now owned by Skylight. The SEZ project also did not see light of day and has now given way to a housing development.
In conclusion, the particular permission Skylight’s plot seems to have allows the owner to develop it for the initial purpose it grants within two years. “If he does not implement the project he can get an extension, but only after demonstrating hardship in fulfilling the original plan,” says the second official. As for the clean chit regarding the land’s value, it’s well known that government valuation of land is typically much lower than what owners actually bargain for.
It is for the Haryana government to examine if Vadra’s reasons to sell the land to DLF lie in ‘hardship’, and if all the other deals he has struck across the state benefited from speedy grants of licences and permits.
Thank you to all those who have taken the trouble to read the article and share their thoughts. Out of the arguments made here, there are two that perhaps need answering. So here they go.
1. The first part of the article compares outcomes (relative percentages of population of the religions concerned) irrespective of the process that led to those outcomes - whether immigration, relatively faster population growth or conversions. This was for two reasons. One, to put the figure of 2.3 per cent in "numerical perspective", as the article itself explained. The second reason was that outcomes are ultimately what the crux of debate is about. The rest of the article in any case dealt with process - or conversions in this case, from both a contemporary and historical perspective.
2. Some commenters have tried to cast doubts on the reliability of Census 2001. Those who do this should bear in mind that Census 2001 was conducted by a BJP government. Considering the extreme importance that BJP gives to this issue, it would be reasonable to expect that IF it had perceived a problem with the methodology that was distorting the numbers, it would have fixed it. As the article mentioned, BJP or BJP-supported governments have been in power for 10 of the last 40 years, or about a quarter of the time, and the only reasonable conclusion one can arrive at is that any misreporting of numbers, real or perceived, would be marginal and hence, not of importance.
To all other arguments made, my answer is the following: Please read the article again, with particular focus on the quotations of Vivekananda and Monier Williams, and the history of the missionary efforts in Bengal and their outcome.
Not a single post from the resident Jihadi Anwaar. Goes to show where his loyalties lie.
Himachal Pradesh assembly had passed a Resolution that non Himachal Pradesh people can't buy land in in the State .
In defiance of the Law Priyanka Gandhi purchased land under Veerbhadra Singh Rule.
Well News already known have now become hot topic.
"""Disclose details of land purchased by Priyanka in 10 days: Himachal Pradesh Information Commission
The Himachal Pradesh State Information Commission on Monday rejected the contention that information regarding purchase of land by Priyanka Vadra near shimla cannot be given for security reasons and directed the concerned authorities to provide all information in this regard to an RTI activist within ten days.
The RTI activist Debasheesh Bhattacharya had sought information about the land purchased by Priyanka at Chharabra, 12-Km from here, but the information was refused by Public Information Office which maintained that it cannot be divulged for security reasons as she was a SPG protectee. The Appellate Authority (the Deputy Commissioner) also rejected the appeal.
Another information:Prem Kumar Dhumal BJP CM allowed Priyanka to purchase adjacent land too.
''Priyanka had purchased the land in question in 2007 during the earlier Congress government, headed by Virbhadra Singh. The Congress government had given relaxations under Section 118 of the HP Tenancy and Land Reforms Act to her to purchase land. The Act debars outsiders and non-agriculturists to buy land in the state. Later, the BJP government, headed by Prem Kumar Dhumal, granted permission to Priyanka to purchase an additional patch of land adjoining the land she had bought. Priyanka is building a three-storey cottage at the site ''
An SIT had been appointed but no further news on the SIT .
Thanks Mam Sonia ji
for wising us on the Land Bill.!!
Who is more wiser than you in these Land scam affairs you have yourself seen how your CM Hooda in Haryana brazenly took over the Land of the Farmers by fraudulently and gave it to Robert Vadra .
Now CAG too has confirmed .
We are also extremely grateful that you took out 100 plus MPs to Prez Parnab ji to bring to the highest Authority in India about the scam NDA Govt is trying to perpetrate on India.
Sincerely hope one march to Hooda's Residence is the need of the time.
Meanwhile must thank you and Left for making us wise.
''Vadra was used as a shield for other land deals: Ashok Khemka
Well, I don' know what made the CM issue this transfer order just five months after my last transfer. After exposing the land licensing scam, I had been transferred to Haryana Seed Development Corporation as its managing director, a very junior level assignment. Why another transfer? Also, it was executed in a very humiliating manner. Even before I got the order, the officer succeeding me came to my office at 3.30pm on Thursday and told me that I should vacate the office so that he can join.
But all the weapons in their armoury were used against me, including abusing and threatening me. And, for what? Wasn't it the late PM Rajiv Gandhi who stated that only Rs 15 out of Rs 100 reached the masses? In my corporation (HSDC) even Rs 15 was not reaching them. I was trying to ensure that the subsidy amount goes directly to the bank account of farmers. Exposing the misappropriation of subsidies and filing cases with the CBI was a duty required of me. To let those implicated in the FIR remain and remove me is greatly disappointing''
We at Outlookindia.com welcome feedback and your comments, including scathing criticism
1. Scathing, passionate, even angry critiques are welcome, but please do not indulge in abuse and invective. Our Primary concern is to keep the debate civil. We urge our users to try and express their disagreements without being disagreeable. Personal attacks are not welcome. No ad hominem please.
2. Please do not post the same message again and again in the same or different threads
3. Please keep your responses confined to the subject matter of the article you are responding to. Please note that our comments section is not a general free-for-all but for feedback to articles/blogs posted on the site
4. Our endeavour is to keep these forums unmoderated and unexpurgated. But if any of the above three conditions are violated, we reserve the right to delete any comment that we deem objectionable and also to withdraw posting privileges from the abuser. Please also note that hate-speech is punishable by law and in extreme circumstances, we may be forced to take legal action by tracing the IP addresses of the poster.
5. If someone is being abusive or personal, or generally being a troll or a flame-baiter, please do not descend to their level. The best response to such posters is to ignore them and send us a message at Mail AT outlookindia DOT com with the subject header COMPLAINT
6. Please do not copy and paste copyrighted material. If you do think that an article elsewhere has relevance to the point you wish to make, please only quote what is considered fair-use and provide a link to the article under question.
7. There is no particular outlookindia.com line on any subject. The views expressed in our opinion section are those of the author concerned and not that of all of outlookindia.com or all its authors.
8. Please also note that you are solely responsible for the comments posted by you on the site. The comments could be deleted or edited entirely at our discretion if we find them objectionable. However, the mere fact of their existence on our site does not mean that we necessarily approve of their contents. In short, the onus of responsibility for the comments remains solely with the authors thereof. Outlookindia.com or any of its group publications, may, however, retains the right to publish any of these comments, with or without editing, in any medium whatsoever. It is therefore in your own interest to be careful before posting.
9.Outlookindia.com is not responsible in any manner whatsoever for how any search engine -- such as Google, Bing etc -- caches or displays these comments. Please note that you are solely responsible for posting these comments and it is a privilege being granted to our registered users which can be withdrawn in case of abuse. To reiterate:
a. Comments once posted can only be deleted at the discretion of outlookindia.com
b. The comments reflect the views of the authors and not of outlookindia.com
c. outlookindia.com is not responsible in any manner whatsoever for the way search engines cache or display these comments
d. Please therefore take due caution before you post any comments as your words could potentially be used against you
10. We have an online thread for our comments policy:
You are welcome to post your suggestions here or in case you have a specific issue, to directly email us at Mail AT outlookindia DOT com with the subject header COMPLAINT