रविवार, 12 जुलाई 2015

Discretionary Quota in Odisha and CAG Report

 Allotment of Plot under Discretionary Quota (DQ), extracts from CAG Report

Every day, mass media carries news about notice issued to different  people by BDA, CDA and Odisha State Housing Board  for return of land allotted  under Discretionary Quota  and multiple allotments. But these authorities  are to  issue  notice  to  important political people  and bureaucrats like Sri Tarun Kanti Mishra, former Chief Secretary, U.N. Behera, Development Commissioner, Sri Bijay Sharma, Addl. DG, Police, Sri Nikunja Dhal, IAS, Sri Debi Prasad Mishra, Minister, Sri Aswani Kumar vaishnav, IAS, Sri Vishal Kumar Dev, IAS, Sri Pranab Balabantaray, MLA, Kalpataru Das, MP, Rajya Sabha, R.K.Sharma, IAS and many  others.

Vacant plots allotted under Discretionary Quota arbitrarily by BDA
Name  of allottee
Plot No ( 2400 Sq.ft. each)
Prachi Enclave Plotted Scheme  Phase-II
Anusuya Mishra, W/O- Debi Prasad Mishra, Minister  for School  and Mass Education
Aswani Kumar Vaishnav
Gourang Kinkar Das, former Vice Chancellor, Utkal University  ( transferred to Rashmi Das)
Pratap Kumar Samal
Pritam Mohapatra
Ravi Kumar Sahani and Punam Sahani
Prachi Enclave Plotted Scheme  Phase-1
Babita Sar
Pratima Das, W/O- Kalpataru Das
Raj Kumar Sharma, IAS
Rajaram Satapathy, Journalist
Satyajit Mohanty
Sobhamayee Dehury, transferred to Narmadha Pradhan
Srimoy Kar, Journalist
Vishal Kumar Dev, IAS
62 A

CAG Report  has also  brought  to  notice  huge scam  and irregularities    in allotment  of plot/ land  to  different  people.    While auditing land / plot allotment made by BDA, CDA and GA, CAG   has mentioned in its audit report that neither the provision for DQ allotment of plots / houses existed in the Act / Rules or any such instruction issued by the Government. Individual brochures of housing schemes of DAs contained provisions for allotment of plots/ houses under DQ of the Chairperson of the concerned DA ( Development Authority)   which ranged between five per cent to ten per cent of the total assets offered under the schemes. However, no eligibility criteria for identification of allottees eligible under DQ had been specified by the DAs in general or in the individual brochure.  

CAG has made audit scrutiny in the 10 test checked housing schemes and exposed huge irregularities  in these schemes.  These are  as follows.

A. Identification of allottees under DQ was arbitrary as the criteria for the same were not specified and applications for allotment under DQ were made on plain paper without any supporting documents such as affidavit regarding non-ownership of land in the concerned DA, as required in the terms and conditions of the brochure for housing schemes.
B.  In case of Udaygiri Vihar Housing Scheme launched for MIG/ LIG houses in 2002, norms regarding income were relaxed (April 2003) for allotment of six assets valued at ` 35.94 lakh out of 20 assets allotted under the DQ.

C.  In eight housing schemes of Bhubaneswar Development Authority, out of 249 applications for allotment of assets under DQ, 129 applicants were allotted assets. It was observed that there was no clear pre-defined criterion for such allotment, thus making the allotment under DQ completely arbitrary and non-transparent.

D. In case of Prachi Enclave Phase–II (BDA), provisional allotment of eight assets worth ` 28.80 lakh was made under DQ to eight individuals in November 2001 before launching the scheme in September 2002, making the allotment process non transparent.

E. In four cases in Bhubaneswar Development Authority, assets worth ` 17.42 lakh were allotted to persons who had earlier also been allotted assets under DQ and transferred one of the assets to third party indicating that the allotment made under DQ was for speculation, rather than for residential purpose.

F. Nine persons already allotted assets under DQ, were allotted another asset each by Bhubaneswar Development Authority either under discretionary or general quota in their names or in the names of their spouses.

G. Thus, due to non formulation of clear guidelines and criteria for identification of  allottees under DQ and lack of subsequent monitoring regarding actual usage of such plots/ buildings, the process of allotment under DQ lacked transparency.

Pradip Pradhan, M-9937843482
Date- 12.7.15 

कोई टिप्पणी नहीं:

एक टिप्पणी भेजें