Reacting to the news stories appearing in newspapers today referring to the report of Principal Accountant General, Haryana alleging that previous Congress Government of Haryana

Reacting to the news stories appearing in newspapers today referring to the report of Principal Accountant General, Haryana alleging that previous Congress Government of Haryana

Reacting to the news stories appearing in newspapers today referring to the report of Principal Accountant General, Haryana alleging that previous Congress Government of Haryana, headed by Shri Bhupinder Singh Hooda, granted undue favour to Skylight Hospitality Private Limited or Shri Robert Vadra by not asking them to deposit profit beyond 15% earned from sale of land, Randeep Singh Surjewala, Incharge Communications, AICC stated as follows:-

 

“News stories are neither borne out from record nor founded upon correct facts. Instead of proceeding to hold the previous Congress Government of Haryana guilty prematurely based on an ex-parte report of Principal Accountant General, Haryana (PAG) as also half truths, innuendoes and insinuations; we must understand the following incontrovertible facts:-

 

Firstly, PAG has neither indicted previous Congress Government of Haryana nor Shri Robert Vadra or Skylight Hospitality Private Limited for any violation of the Haryana Development and Regulation of Urban Areas Act, 1975 or any rules or policy. There is no such finding of wrongdoing as is being sought to be alleged and projected unfairly and incorrectly.

 

Secondly, condition qua deposit of profit beyond 15% applies only to ‘completed projects’. It certainly does not apply to ongoing projects which are permitted to be sold/transferred in accordance with the Haryana Act of 1975 on deposit of requisite transfer charges (Section 24 of the Act of 1975 read with Rule 17 of 1976 Rules). As Skylight Hospitality Private Limited had sold/transferred its licence for 2.7 acres of land before completing the project, this condition did not apply at all.  Hence, no law, rule or policy was violated by previous Congress Government.

 

Thirdly, since inception of Haryana and enactment of the Act of 1975 i.e. in last 40 years, Government of Haryana has not received a single rupee in revenue towards 15% profit clause.

 

For this reason, Section 3(7) of the Haryana Act of 1975 provides that developer of a colony could either deposit profit beyond 15% or deposit ‘infrastructure augmentation charges’ in lieu thereof notified as Rs.5 lakh per acre for Gurgaon. For 2.7 acres licence of Skylight Hospitality Private Limited, this figure, at best, comes to Rs.13.5 lakh. According to previous Congress Government, this amount was not got deposited as project was not completed.

 

Fourthly, news stories omitted to mention that report of PAG is an ex-parte report with BJP Government of Haryana refusing to reply to all the notices/letters/communications by PAG for politically motivated reasons. [Please see para 2.3.4, page 44 of PAG’s report which admits that – “Replies of the Government have also been received (except paragraph 2.3.10.1)]. Present BJP Government of Haryana chose not to reply or bring on record the aforesaid incontrovertible facts and statutory provisions leading to finalization of interim preliminary objections of PAG. This fact has also been admitted by Additional Chief Secretary, Town & Country Planning, Haryana yesterday, who stated that Government of Haryana has now prepared a reply, which it will be submitting to PAG. Once an ex-parte report of PAG is already submitted to the Legislature, filing of a reply to the objections raised by PAG by State Government is itself meaningless and reflective of patent malafides and mal-intention on its part.”

 

RANDEEP SINGH SURJEWALA