Deprecated (16384): The ArrayAccess methods will be removed in 4.0.0.Use getParam(), getData() and getQuery() instead. - /home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php, line: 73
 You can disable deprecation warnings by setting `Error.errorLevel` to `E_ALL & ~E_USER_DEPRECATED` in your config/app.php. [CORE/src/Core/functions.php, line 311]
Code Context


        trigger_error($message, E_USER_DEPRECATED);

    }
$message = 'The ArrayAccess methods will be removed in 4.0.0.Use getParam(), getData() and getQuery() instead. - /home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php, line: 73
 You can disable deprecation warnings by setting `Error.errorLevel` to `E_ALL & ~E_USER_DEPRECATED` in your config/app.php.'
$stackFrame = (int) 1
$trace = [
	(int) 0 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/ServerRequest.php',
		'line' => (int) 2421,
		'function' => 'deprecationWarning',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => 'The ArrayAccess methods will be removed in 4.0.0.Use getParam(), getData() and getQuery() instead.'
		]
	],
	(int) 1 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php',
		'line' => (int) 73,
		'function' => 'offsetGet',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\ServerRequest',
		'object' => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => 'catslug'
		]
	],
	(int) 2 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Controller/Controller.php',
		'line' => (int) 610,
		'function' => 'printArticle',
		'class' => 'App\Controller\ArtileDetailController',
		'object' => object(App\Controller\ArtileDetailController) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => []
	],
	(int) 3 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php',
		'line' => (int) 120,
		'function' => 'invokeAction',
		'class' => 'Cake\Controller\Controller',
		'object' => object(App\Controller\ArtileDetailController) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => []
	],
	(int) 4 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php',
		'line' => (int) 94,
		'function' => '_invoke',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher',
		'object' => object(Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(App\Controller\ArtileDetailController) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 5 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/BaseApplication.php',
		'line' => (int) 235,
		'function' => 'dispatch',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher',
		'object' => object(Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 6 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Runner.php',
		'line' => (int) 65,
		'function' => '__invoke',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\BaseApplication',
		'object' => object(App\Application) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {},
			(int) 2 => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 7 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Routing/Middleware/RoutingMiddleware.php',
		'line' => (int) 162,
		'function' => '__invoke',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\Runner',
		'object' => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 8 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Runner.php',
		'line' => (int) 65,
		'function' => '__invoke',
		'class' => 'Cake\Routing\Middleware\RoutingMiddleware',
		'object' => object(Cake\Routing\Middleware\RoutingMiddleware) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {},
			(int) 2 => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 9 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Routing/Middleware/AssetMiddleware.php',
		'line' => (int) 88,
		'function' => '__invoke',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\Runner',
		'object' => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 10 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Runner.php',
		'line' => (int) 65,
		'function' => '__invoke',
		'class' => 'Cake\Routing\Middleware\AssetMiddleware',
		'object' => object(Cake\Routing\Middleware\AssetMiddleware) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {},
			(int) 2 => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 11 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Error/Middleware/ErrorHandlerMiddleware.php',
		'line' => (int) 96,
		'function' => '__invoke',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\Runner',
		'object' => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 12 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Runner.php',
		'line' => (int) 65,
		'function' => '__invoke',
		'class' => 'Cake\Error\Middleware\ErrorHandlerMiddleware',
		'object' => object(Cake\Error\Middleware\ErrorHandlerMiddleware) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {},
			(int) 2 => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 13 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Runner.php',
		'line' => (int) 51,
		'function' => '__invoke',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\Runner',
		'object' => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 14 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Server.php',
		'line' => (int) 98,
		'function' => 'run',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\Runner',
		'object' => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\MiddlewareQueue) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 2 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 15 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/webroot/index.php',
		'line' => (int) 39,
		'function' => 'run',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\Server',
		'object' => object(Cake\Http\Server) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => []
	]
]
$frame = [
	'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php',
	'line' => (int) 73,
	'function' => 'offsetGet',
	'class' => 'Cake\Http\ServerRequest',
	'object' => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {
		trustProxy => false
		[protected] params => [
			[maximum depth reached]
		]
		[protected] data => [[maximum depth reached]]
		[protected] query => [[maximum depth reached]]
		[protected] cookies => [
			[maximum depth reached]
		]
		[protected] _environment => [
			[maximum depth reached]
		]
		[protected] url => 'latest-news-updates/cag-questions-costing-of-350-acre-gurgaon-land-sold-to-dlf-navneet-sharma-19783/print'
		[protected] base => ''
		[protected] webroot => '/'
		[protected] here => '/latest-news-updates/cag-questions-costing-of-350-acre-gurgaon-land-sold-to-dlf-navneet-sharma-19783/print'
		[protected] trustedProxies => [[maximum depth reached]]
		[protected] _input => null
		[protected] _detectors => [
			[maximum depth reached]
		]
		[protected] _detectorCache => [
			[maximum depth reached]
		]
		[protected] stream => object(Zend\Diactoros\PhpInputStream) {}
		[protected] uri => object(Zend\Diactoros\Uri) {}
		[protected] session => object(Cake\Http\Session) {}
		[protected] attributes => [[maximum depth reached]]
		[protected] emulatedAttributes => [
			[maximum depth reached]
		]
		[protected] uploadedFiles => [[maximum depth reached]]
		[protected] protocol => null
		[protected] requestTarget => null
		[private] deprecatedProperties => [
			[maximum depth reached]
		]
	},
	'type' => '->',
	'args' => [
		(int) 0 => 'catslug'
	]
]
deprecationWarning - CORE/src/Core/functions.php, line 311
Cake\Http\ServerRequest::offsetGet() - CORE/src/Http/ServerRequest.php, line 2421
App\Controller\ArtileDetailController::printArticle() - APP/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php, line 73
Cake\Controller\Controller::invokeAction() - CORE/src/Controller/Controller.php, line 610
Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::_invoke() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 120
Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::dispatch() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 94
Cake\Http\BaseApplication::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/BaseApplication.php, line 235
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Routing\Middleware\RoutingMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/RoutingMiddleware.php, line 162
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Routing\Middleware\AssetMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/AssetMiddleware.php, line 88
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Error\Middleware\ErrorHandlerMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Error/Middleware/ErrorHandlerMiddleware.php, line 96
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Http\Runner::run() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 51
Cake\Http\Server::run() - CORE/src/Http/Server.php, line 98

Deprecated (16384): The ArrayAccess methods will be removed in 4.0.0.Use getParam(), getData() and getQuery() instead. - /home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php, line: 74
 You can disable deprecation warnings by setting `Error.errorLevel` to `E_ALL & ~E_USER_DEPRECATED` in your config/app.php. [CORE/src/Core/functions.php, line 311]
Code Context


        trigger_error($message, E_USER_DEPRECATED);

    }
$message = 'The ArrayAccess methods will be removed in 4.0.0.Use getParam(), getData() and getQuery() instead. - /home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php, line: 74
 You can disable deprecation warnings by setting `Error.errorLevel` to `E_ALL & ~E_USER_DEPRECATED` in your config/app.php.'
$stackFrame = (int) 1
$trace = [
	(int) 0 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/ServerRequest.php',
		'line' => (int) 2421,
		'function' => 'deprecationWarning',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => 'The ArrayAccess methods will be removed in 4.0.0.Use getParam(), getData() and getQuery() instead.'
		]
	],
	(int) 1 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php',
		'line' => (int) 74,
		'function' => 'offsetGet',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\ServerRequest',
		'object' => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => 'artileslug'
		]
	],
	(int) 2 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Controller/Controller.php',
		'line' => (int) 610,
		'function' => 'printArticle',
		'class' => 'App\Controller\ArtileDetailController',
		'object' => object(App\Controller\ArtileDetailController) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => []
	],
	(int) 3 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php',
		'line' => (int) 120,
		'function' => 'invokeAction',
		'class' => 'Cake\Controller\Controller',
		'object' => object(App\Controller\ArtileDetailController) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => []
	],
	(int) 4 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php',
		'line' => (int) 94,
		'function' => '_invoke',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher',
		'object' => object(Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(App\Controller\ArtileDetailController) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 5 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/BaseApplication.php',
		'line' => (int) 235,
		'function' => 'dispatch',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher',
		'object' => object(Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 6 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Runner.php',
		'line' => (int) 65,
		'function' => '__invoke',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\BaseApplication',
		'object' => object(App\Application) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {},
			(int) 2 => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 7 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Routing/Middleware/RoutingMiddleware.php',
		'line' => (int) 162,
		'function' => '__invoke',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\Runner',
		'object' => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 8 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Runner.php',
		'line' => (int) 65,
		'function' => '__invoke',
		'class' => 'Cake\Routing\Middleware\RoutingMiddleware',
		'object' => object(Cake\Routing\Middleware\RoutingMiddleware) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {},
			(int) 2 => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 9 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Routing/Middleware/AssetMiddleware.php',
		'line' => (int) 88,
		'function' => '__invoke',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\Runner',
		'object' => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 10 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Runner.php',
		'line' => (int) 65,
		'function' => '__invoke',
		'class' => 'Cake\Routing\Middleware\AssetMiddleware',
		'object' => object(Cake\Routing\Middleware\AssetMiddleware) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {},
			(int) 2 => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 11 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Error/Middleware/ErrorHandlerMiddleware.php',
		'line' => (int) 96,
		'function' => '__invoke',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\Runner',
		'object' => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 12 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Runner.php',
		'line' => (int) 65,
		'function' => '__invoke',
		'class' => 'Cake\Error\Middleware\ErrorHandlerMiddleware',
		'object' => object(Cake\Error\Middleware\ErrorHandlerMiddleware) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {},
			(int) 2 => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 13 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Runner.php',
		'line' => (int) 51,
		'function' => '__invoke',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\Runner',
		'object' => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 14 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Server.php',
		'line' => (int) 98,
		'function' => 'run',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\Runner',
		'object' => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\MiddlewareQueue) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 2 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 15 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/webroot/index.php',
		'line' => (int) 39,
		'function' => 'run',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\Server',
		'object' => object(Cake\Http\Server) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => []
	]
]
$frame = [
	'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php',
	'line' => (int) 74,
	'function' => 'offsetGet',
	'class' => 'Cake\Http\ServerRequest',
	'object' => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {
		trustProxy => false
		[protected] params => [
			[maximum depth reached]
		]
		[protected] data => [[maximum depth reached]]
		[protected] query => [[maximum depth reached]]
		[protected] cookies => [
			[maximum depth reached]
		]
		[protected] _environment => [
			[maximum depth reached]
		]
		[protected] url => 'latest-news-updates/cag-questions-costing-of-350-acre-gurgaon-land-sold-to-dlf-navneet-sharma-19783/print'
		[protected] base => ''
		[protected] webroot => '/'
		[protected] here => '/latest-news-updates/cag-questions-costing-of-350-acre-gurgaon-land-sold-to-dlf-navneet-sharma-19783/print'
		[protected] trustedProxies => [[maximum depth reached]]
		[protected] _input => null
		[protected] _detectors => [
			[maximum depth reached]
		]
		[protected] _detectorCache => [
			[maximum depth reached]
		]
		[protected] stream => object(Zend\Diactoros\PhpInputStream) {}
		[protected] uri => object(Zend\Diactoros\Uri) {}
		[protected] session => object(Cake\Http\Session) {}
		[protected] attributes => [[maximum depth reached]]
		[protected] emulatedAttributes => [
			[maximum depth reached]
		]
		[protected] uploadedFiles => [[maximum depth reached]]
		[protected] protocol => null
		[protected] requestTarget => null
		[private] deprecatedProperties => [
			[maximum depth reached]
		]
	},
	'type' => '->',
	'args' => [
		(int) 0 => 'artileslug'
	]
]
deprecationWarning - CORE/src/Core/functions.php, line 311
Cake\Http\ServerRequest::offsetGet() - CORE/src/Http/ServerRequest.php, line 2421
App\Controller\ArtileDetailController::printArticle() - APP/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php, line 74
Cake\Controller\Controller::invokeAction() - CORE/src/Controller/Controller.php, line 610
Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::_invoke() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 120
Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::dispatch() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 94
Cake\Http\BaseApplication::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/BaseApplication.php, line 235
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Routing\Middleware\RoutingMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/RoutingMiddleware.php, line 162
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Routing\Middleware\AssetMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/AssetMiddleware.php, line 88
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Error\Middleware\ErrorHandlerMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Error/Middleware/ErrorHandlerMiddleware.php, line 96
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Http\Runner::run() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 51
Cake\Http\Server::run() - CORE/src/Http/Server.php, line 98

Warning (512): Unable to emit headers. Headers sent in file=/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Error/Debugger.php line=853 [CORE/src/Http/ResponseEmitter.php, line 48]
Code Context
            if (Configure::read('debug')) {

                trigger_error($message, E_USER_WARNING);

            } else {
$response = object(Cake\Http\Response) {

	'status' => (int) 200,
	'contentType' => 'text/html',
	'headers' => [
		'Content-Type' => [
			[maximum depth reached]
		]
	],
	'file' => null,
	'fileRange' => [],
	'cookies' => object(Cake\Http\Cookie\CookieCollection) {},
	'cacheDirectives' => [],
	'body' => '<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Transitional//EN"
        "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-transitional.dtd">
<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">
<head>
    <link rel="canonical" href="https://im4change.in/<pre class="cake-error"><a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="document.getElementById('cakeErr67ff040361de8-trace').style.display = (document.getElementById('cakeErr67ff040361de8-trace').style.display == 'none' ? '' : 'none');"><b>Notice</b> (8)</a>: Undefined variable: urlPrefix [<b>APP/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp</b>, line <b>8</b>]<div id="cakeErr67ff040361de8-trace" class="cake-stack-trace" style="display: none;"><a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="document.getElementById('cakeErr67ff040361de8-code').style.display = (document.getElementById('cakeErr67ff040361de8-code').style.display == 'none' ? '' : 'none')">Code</a> <a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="document.getElementById('cakeErr67ff040361de8-context').style.display = (document.getElementById('cakeErr67ff040361de8-context').style.display == 'none' ? '' : 'none')">Context</a><pre id="cakeErr67ff040361de8-code" class="cake-code-dump" style="display: none;"><code><span style="color: #000000"><span style="color: #0000BB"></span><span style="color: #007700">&lt;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">head</span><span style="color: #007700">&gt;
</span></span></code>
<span class="code-highlight"><code><span style="color: #000000">&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&lt;link&nbsp;rel="canonical"&nbsp;href="<span style="color: #0000BB">&lt;?php&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #007700">echo&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">Configure</span><span style="color: #007700">::</span><span style="color: #0000BB">read</span><span style="color: #007700">(</span><span style="color: #DD0000">'SITE_URL'</span><span style="color: #007700">);&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">?&gt;&lt;?php&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #007700">echo&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">$urlPrefix</span><span style="color: #007700">;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">?&gt;&lt;?php&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #007700">echo&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">$article_current</span><span style="color: #007700">-&gt;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">category</span><span style="color: #007700">-&gt;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">slug</span><span style="color: #007700">;&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">?&gt;</span>/<span style="color: #0000BB">&lt;?php&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #007700">echo&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">$article_current</span><span style="color: #007700">-&gt;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">seo_url</span><span style="color: #007700">;&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">?&gt;</span>.html"/&gt;
</span></code></span>
<code><span style="color: #000000"><span style="color: #0000BB">&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #007700">&lt;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">meta&nbsp;http</span><span style="color: #007700">-</span><span style="color: #0000BB">equiv</span><span style="color: #007700">=</span><span style="color: #DD0000">"Content-Type"&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">content</span><span style="color: #007700">=</span><span style="color: #DD0000">"text/html;&nbsp;charset=utf-8"</span><span style="color: #007700">/&gt;
</span></span></code></pre><pre id="cakeErr67ff040361de8-context" class="cake-context" style="display: none;">$viewFile = &#039;/home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp&#039;
$dataForView = [
	&#039;article_current&#039; =&gt; object(App\Model\Entity\Article) {

		&#039;id&#039; =&gt; (int) 19644,
		&#039;title&#039; =&gt; &#039;CAG questions costing of 350-acre Gurgaon land sold to DLF -Navneet Sharma&#039;,
		&#039;subheading&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
		&#039;description&#039; =&gt; &#039;&lt;div align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;
-The Hindustan Times&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
In what seems set to provide fresh ammo to its political rivals, the comptroller and auditor general (CAG) is learnt to have raised questions about the valuation of 350 acres given by the Haryana government to realty major DLF Limited in Gurgaon through competitive bidding for setting up a recreation-cum-leisure project.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The CAG, which examined the procedures and the competitive bidding route taken by the Haryana State Industrial and Infrastructure Development Corporation (HSIIDC), found that the state-owned corporation had extended &amp;quot;undue favour&amp;quot; to DLF by transferring the forest land and selling the land below its market value and suffered a loss of Rs. 438 crore, besides allowing benefit of extra floor area ratio (FAR).&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
FAR is the ratio of the total floor area of buildings to the size of the land or the limit imposed on such a ratio.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;em&gt;&#039;Wrong valuation&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;/em&gt;&lt;br /&gt;
The reserve price of the land was fixed on the lower side due to &amp;quot;wrong costing&amp;quot;, according to the findings conveyed by the auditors to HSIIDC in December 2012. Aam Aadmi Party convener Arvind Kejriwal and the opposition Indian National Lok Dal (INLD) have accused the Hooda Government in the past of &amp;quot;favouring&amp;quot; the developer in this deal. The state government and DLF had both vehemently denied the allegations at that time.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
However, the auditors are learnt to have pointed out now that ILFS Infrastructure Development Corporation Limited, consultant for assessment of land cost and preparation of handholding documents, had valued the land cost by using a mixed approach - multiplying average market rate of land with average district collector (DC) rate. The CAG report, according to sources, noted that the market rate for residential plots was 2.79 times more of average DC rate and average market rate for commercial plots was 3.105 times more of average DC rate, but the consultant ignored the actual market rates and took the factor of 1.8 times of average DC rates for reasons not available on record for valuation of residential land and factor of 3.12 times for valuation of commercial plots.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;quot;The value of property considering factors adopted by the valuers worked out to Rs. 1,683 crore, whereas the valuation of property by considering correct average factors for residential area and commercial plots works out to Rs. 2,142 crore. However, the corporation in April 2008 approved the reserved price of the land at Rs. 1,700 crore on the basis of valuations without looking at the calculations,&amp;quot; sources said, quoting the auditors&#039; findings.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;em&gt;Sole bidder left&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;/em&gt;&lt;br /&gt;
The corporation had floated the scheme in January 2009 for sale of the land and only one bid was received from DLF in April 2009. The bidder was found to be technically qualified and its bid of Rs. 12,000 per square metre was opened. However, it made certain suggestions to make the project &amp;quot;financially viable&amp;quot;. The project parameters were re-examined and modified, allowing additional FAR at the rate of 20% of area to the successful bidder as per the decision taken by the then principal secretary, town and country planning, in July 2009. The project was re-advertised on July 20, 2009, and two additional bids from Country Heights Holdings, Berhad (Malayisa) and consortium led by Unitech Limited were received.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
While the technical bids were opened on August 12, 2009, HSIIDC rejected the bids submitted by Country Heights Holdings and Unitech Limited on the ground of their being &amp;quot;technically non-responsive&amp;quot; due to not fulfilling the minimum criteria and decided not to open their financial bids. The financial bid of DLF, which was the sole bidder left in the process, of Rs. 1,703 crore was accepted and subsequently approved by the state government. In February 2010, the developer was issued the regular letter of allotment for the land.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
In addition, the CAG is learnt to have examined the release of land from the acquisition process by the state government in favour of private developers and its licensing policy by way of a special audit of the town and country planning department, finding instances of &amp;quot;undue favour&amp;quot; and insufficient planning in some cases.
&lt;/div&gt;&#039;,
		&#039;credit_writer&#039; =&gt; &#039;The Hindustan Times, 7 March, 2013, http://www.hindustantimes.com/Punjab/Chandigarh/CAG-questions-costing-of-350-acre-Gurgaon-land-sold-to-DLF/SP-Article1-1022494.aspx&#039;,
		&#039;article_img&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
		&#039;article_img_thumb&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
		&#039;status&#039; =&gt; (int) 1,
		&#039;show_on_home&#039; =&gt; (int) 1,
		&#039;lang&#039; =&gt; &#039;EN&#039;,
		&#039;category_id&#039; =&gt; (int) 16,
		&#039;tag_keyword&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
		&#039;seo_url&#039; =&gt; &#039;cag-questions-costing-of-350-acre-gurgaon-land-sold-to-dlf-navneet-sharma-19783&#039;,
		&#039;meta_title&#039; =&gt; null,
		&#039;meta_keywords&#039; =&gt; null,
		&#039;meta_description&#039; =&gt; null,
		&#039;noindex&#039; =&gt; (int) 0,
		&#039;publish_date&#039; =&gt; object(Cake\I18n\FrozenDate) {},
		&#039;most_visit_section_id&#039; =&gt; null,
		&#039;article_big_img&#039; =&gt; null,
		&#039;liveid&#039; =&gt; (int) 19783,
		&#039;created&#039; =&gt; object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {},
		&#039;modified&#039; =&gt; object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {},
		&#039;edate&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
		&#039;tags&#039; =&gt; [
			[maximum depth reached]
		],
		&#039;category&#039; =&gt; object(App\Model\Entity\Category) {},
		&#039;[new]&#039; =&gt; false,
		&#039;[accessible]&#039; =&gt; [
			[maximum depth reached]
		],
		&#039;[dirty]&#039; =&gt; [[maximum depth reached]],
		&#039;[original]&#039; =&gt; [[maximum depth reached]],
		&#039;[virtual]&#039; =&gt; [[maximum depth reached]],
		&#039;[hasErrors]&#039; =&gt; false,
		&#039;[errors]&#039; =&gt; [[maximum depth reached]],
		&#039;[invalid]&#039; =&gt; [[maximum depth reached]],
		&#039;[repository]&#039; =&gt; &#039;Articles&#039;
	
	},
	&#039;articleid&#039; =&gt; (int) 19644,
	&#039;metaTitle&#039; =&gt; &#039;LATEST NEWS UPDATES | CAG questions costing of 350-acre Gurgaon land sold to DLF -Navneet Sharma&#039;,
	&#039;metaKeywords&#039; =&gt; &#039;Comptroller and Auditor-General,CAG,Corruption,Land&#039;,
	&#039;metaDesc&#039; =&gt; &#039;
-The Hindustan Times

In what seems set to provide fresh ammo to its political rivals, the comptroller and auditor general (CAG) is learnt to have raised questions about the valuation of 350 acres given by the Haryana government to realty major...&#039;,
	&#039;disp&#039; =&gt; &#039;&lt;div align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;-The Hindustan Times&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;In what seems set to provide fresh ammo to its political rivals, the comptroller and auditor general (CAG) is learnt to have raised questions about the valuation of 350 acres given by the Haryana government to realty major DLF Limited in Gurgaon through competitive bidding for setting up a recreation-cum-leisure project.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;The CAG, which examined the procedures and the competitive bidding route taken by the Haryana State Industrial and Infrastructure Development Corporation (HSIIDC), found that the state-owned corporation had extended &amp;quot;undue favour&amp;quot; to DLF by transferring the forest land and selling the land below its market value and suffered a loss of Rs. 438 crore, besides allowing benefit of extra floor area ratio (FAR).&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;FAR is the ratio of the total floor area of buildings to the size of the land or the limit imposed on such a ratio.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;em&gt;&#039;Wrong valuation&#039;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/em&gt;&lt;br /&gt;The reserve price of the land was fixed on the lower side due to &amp;quot;wrong costing&amp;quot;, according to the findings conveyed by the auditors to HSIIDC in December 2012. Aam Aadmi Party convener Arvind Kejriwal and the opposition Indian National Lok Dal (INLD) have accused the Hooda Government in the past of &amp;quot;favouring&amp;quot; the developer in this deal. The state government and DLF had both vehemently denied the allegations at that time.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;However, the auditors are learnt to have pointed out now that ILFS Infrastructure Development Corporation Limited, consultant for assessment of land cost and preparation of handholding documents, had valued the land cost by using a mixed approach - multiplying average market rate of land with average district collector (DC) rate. The CAG report, according to sources, noted that the market rate for residential plots was 2.79 times more of average DC rate and average market rate for commercial plots was 3.105 times more of average DC rate, but the consultant ignored the actual market rates and took the factor of 1.8 times of average DC rates for reasons not available on record for valuation of residential land and factor of 3.12 times for valuation of commercial plots.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&amp;quot;The value of property considering factors adopted by the valuers worked out to Rs. 1,683 crore, whereas the valuation of property by considering correct average factors for residential area and commercial plots works out to Rs. 2,142 crore. However, the corporation in April 2008 approved the reserved price of the land at Rs. 1,700 crore on the basis of valuations without looking at the calculations,&amp;quot; sources said, quoting the auditors&#039; findings.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;em&gt;Sole bidder left&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/em&gt;&lt;br /&gt;The corporation had floated the scheme in January 2009 for sale of the land and only one bid was received from DLF in April 2009. The bidder was found to be technically qualified and its bid of Rs. 12,000 per square metre was opened. However, it made certain suggestions to make the project &amp;quot;financially viable&amp;quot;. The project parameters were re-examined and modified, allowing additional FAR at the rate of 20% of area to the successful bidder as per the decision taken by the then principal secretary, town and country planning, in July 2009. The project was re-advertised on July 20, 2009, and two additional bids from Country Heights Holdings, Berhad (Malayisa) and consortium led by Unitech Limited were received.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;While the technical bids were opened on August 12, 2009, HSIIDC rejected the bids submitted by Country Heights Holdings and Unitech Limited on the ground of their being &amp;quot;technically non-responsive&amp;quot; due to not fulfilling the minimum criteria and decided not to open their financial bids. The financial bid of DLF, which was the sole bidder left in the process, of Rs. 1,703 crore was accepted and subsequently approved by the state government. In February 2010, the developer was issued the regular letter of allotment for the land.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;In addition, the CAG is learnt to have examined the release of land from the acquisition process by the state government in favour of private developers and its licensing policy by way of a special audit of the town and country planning department, finding instances of &amp;quot;undue favour&amp;quot; and insufficient planning in some cases.&lt;/div&gt;&#039;,
	&#039;lang&#039; =&gt; &#039;English&#039;,
	&#039;SITE_URL&#039; =&gt; &#039;https://im4change.in/&#039;,
	&#039;site_title&#039; =&gt; &#039;im4change&#039;,
	&#039;adminprix&#039; =&gt; &#039;admin&#039;
]
$article_current = object(App\Model\Entity\Article) {

	&#039;id&#039; =&gt; (int) 19644,
	&#039;title&#039; =&gt; &#039;CAG questions costing of 350-acre Gurgaon land sold to DLF -Navneet Sharma&#039;,
	&#039;subheading&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
	&#039;description&#039; =&gt; &#039;&lt;div align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;
-The Hindustan Times&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
In what seems set to provide fresh ammo to its political rivals, the comptroller and auditor general (CAG) is learnt to have raised questions about the valuation of 350 acres given by the Haryana government to realty major DLF Limited in Gurgaon through competitive bidding for setting up a recreation-cum-leisure project.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The CAG, which examined the procedures and the competitive bidding route taken by the Haryana State Industrial and Infrastructure Development Corporation (HSIIDC), found that the state-owned corporation had extended &amp;quot;undue favour&amp;quot; to DLF by transferring the forest land and selling the land below its market value and suffered a loss of Rs. 438 crore, besides allowing benefit of extra floor area ratio (FAR).&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
FAR is the ratio of the total floor area of buildings to the size of the land or the limit imposed on such a ratio.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;em&gt;&#039;Wrong valuation&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;/em&gt;&lt;br /&gt;
The reserve price of the land was fixed on the lower side due to &amp;quot;wrong costing&amp;quot;, according to the findings conveyed by the auditors to HSIIDC in December 2012. Aam Aadmi Party convener Arvind Kejriwal and the opposition Indian National Lok Dal (INLD) have accused the Hooda Government in the past of &amp;quot;favouring&amp;quot; the developer in this deal. The state government and DLF had both vehemently denied the allegations at that time.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
However, the auditors are learnt to have pointed out now that ILFS Infrastructure Development Corporation Limited, consultant for assessment of land cost and preparation of handholding documents, had valued the land cost by using a mixed approach - multiplying average market rate of land with average district collector (DC) rate. The CAG report, according to sources, noted that the market rate for residential plots was 2.79 times more of average DC rate and average market rate for commercial plots was 3.105 times more of average DC rate, but the consultant ignored the actual market rates and took the factor of 1.8 times of average DC rates for reasons not available on record for valuation of residential land and factor of 3.12 times for valuation of commercial plots.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;quot;The value of property considering factors adopted by the valuers worked out to Rs. 1,683 crore, whereas the valuation of property by considering correct average factors for residential area and commercial plots works out to Rs. 2,142 crore. However, the corporation in April 2008 approved the reserved price of the land at Rs. 1,700 crore on the basis of valuations without looking at the calculations,&amp;quot; sources said, quoting the auditors&#039; findings.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;em&gt;Sole bidder left&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;/em&gt;&lt;br /&gt;
The corporation had floated the scheme in January 2009 for sale of the land and only one bid was received from DLF in April 2009. The bidder was found to be technically qualified and its bid of Rs. 12,000 per square metre was opened. However, it made certain suggestions to make the project &amp;quot;financially viable&amp;quot;. The project parameters were re-examined and modified, allowing additional FAR at the rate of 20% of area to the successful bidder as per the decision taken by the then principal secretary, town and country planning, in July 2009. The project was re-advertised on July 20, 2009, and two additional bids from Country Heights Holdings, Berhad (Malayisa) and consortium led by Unitech Limited were received.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
While the technical bids were opened on August 12, 2009, HSIIDC rejected the bids submitted by Country Heights Holdings and Unitech Limited on the ground of their being &amp;quot;technically non-responsive&amp;quot; due to not fulfilling the minimum criteria and decided not to open their financial bids. The financial bid of DLF, which was the sole bidder left in the process, of Rs. 1,703 crore was accepted and subsequently approved by the state government. In February 2010, the developer was issued the regular letter of allotment for the land.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
In addition, the CAG is learnt to have examined the release of land from the acquisition process by the state government in favour of private developers and its licensing policy by way of a special audit of the town and country planning department, finding instances of &amp;quot;undue favour&amp;quot; and insufficient planning in some cases.
&lt;/div&gt;&#039;,
	&#039;credit_writer&#039; =&gt; &#039;The Hindustan Times, 7 March, 2013, http://www.hindustantimes.com/Punjab/Chandigarh/CAG-questions-costing-of-350-acre-Gurgaon-land-sold-to-DLF/SP-Article1-1022494.aspx&#039;,
	&#039;article_img&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
	&#039;article_img_thumb&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
	&#039;status&#039; =&gt; (int) 1,
	&#039;show_on_home&#039; =&gt; (int) 1,
	&#039;lang&#039; =&gt; &#039;EN&#039;,
	&#039;category_id&#039; =&gt; (int) 16,
	&#039;tag_keyword&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
	&#039;seo_url&#039; =&gt; &#039;cag-questions-costing-of-350-acre-gurgaon-land-sold-to-dlf-navneet-sharma-19783&#039;,
	&#039;meta_title&#039; =&gt; null,
	&#039;meta_keywords&#039; =&gt; null,
	&#039;meta_description&#039; =&gt; null,
	&#039;noindex&#039; =&gt; (int) 0,
	&#039;publish_date&#039; =&gt; object(Cake\I18n\FrozenDate) {},
	&#039;most_visit_section_id&#039; =&gt; null,
	&#039;article_big_img&#039; =&gt; null,
	&#039;liveid&#039; =&gt; (int) 19783,
	&#039;created&#039; =&gt; object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {},
	&#039;modified&#039; =&gt; object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {},
	&#039;edate&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
	&#039;tags&#039; =&gt; [
		(int) 0 =&gt; object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {},
		(int) 1 =&gt; object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {},
		(int) 2 =&gt; object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {},
		(int) 3 =&gt; object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {}
	],
	&#039;category&#039; =&gt; object(App\Model\Entity\Category) {},
	&#039;[new]&#039; =&gt; false,
	&#039;[accessible]&#039; =&gt; [
		&#039;*&#039; =&gt; true,
		&#039;id&#039; =&gt; false
	],
	&#039;[dirty]&#039; =&gt; [],
	&#039;[original]&#039; =&gt; [],
	&#039;[virtual]&#039; =&gt; [],
	&#039;[hasErrors]&#039; =&gt; false,
	&#039;[errors]&#039; =&gt; [],
	&#039;[invalid]&#039; =&gt; [],
	&#039;[repository]&#039; =&gt; &#039;Articles&#039;

}
$articleid = (int) 19644
$metaTitle = &#039;LATEST NEWS UPDATES | CAG questions costing of 350-acre Gurgaon land sold to DLF -Navneet Sharma&#039;
$metaKeywords = &#039;Comptroller and Auditor-General,CAG,Corruption,Land&#039;
$metaDesc = &#039;
-The Hindustan Times

In what seems set to provide fresh ammo to its political rivals, the comptroller and auditor general (CAG) is learnt to have raised questions about the valuation of 350 acres given by the Haryana government to realty major...&#039;
$disp = &#039;&lt;div align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;-The Hindustan Times&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;In what seems set to provide fresh ammo to its political rivals, the comptroller and auditor general (CAG) is learnt to have raised questions about the valuation of 350 acres given by the Haryana government to realty major DLF Limited in Gurgaon through competitive bidding for setting up a recreation-cum-leisure project.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;The CAG, which examined the procedures and the competitive bidding route taken by the Haryana State Industrial and Infrastructure Development Corporation (HSIIDC), found that the state-owned corporation had extended &amp;quot;undue favour&amp;quot; to DLF by transferring the forest land and selling the land below its market value and suffered a loss of Rs. 438 crore, besides allowing benefit of extra floor area ratio (FAR).&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;FAR is the ratio of the total floor area of buildings to the size of the land or the limit imposed on such a ratio.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;em&gt;&#039;Wrong valuation&#039;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/em&gt;&lt;br /&gt;The reserve price of the land was fixed on the lower side due to &amp;quot;wrong costing&amp;quot;, according to the findings conveyed by the auditors to HSIIDC in December 2012. Aam Aadmi Party convener Arvind Kejriwal and the opposition Indian National Lok Dal (INLD) have accused the Hooda Government in the past of &amp;quot;favouring&amp;quot; the developer in this deal. The state government and DLF had both vehemently denied the allegations at that time.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;However, the auditors are learnt to have pointed out now that ILFS Infrastructure Development Corporation Limited, consultant for assessment of land cost and preparation of handholding documents, had valued the land cost by using a mixed approach - multiplying average market rate of land with average district collector (DC) rate. The CAG report, according to sources, noted that the market rate for residential plots was 2.79 times more of average DC rate and average market rate for commercial plots was 3.105 times more of average DC rate, but the consultant ignored the actual market rates and took the factor of 1.8 times of average DC rates for reasons not available on record for valuation of residential land and factor of 3.12 times for valuation of commercial plots.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&amp;quot;The value of property considering factors adopted by the valuers worked out to Rs. 1,683 crore, whereas the valuation of property by considering correct average factors for residential area and commercial plots works out to Rs. 2,142 crore. However, the corporation in April 2008 approved the reserved price of the land at Rs. 1,700 crore on the basis of valuations without looking at the calculations,&amp;quot; sources said, quoting the auditors&#039; findings.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;em&gt;Sole bidder left&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/em&gt;&lt;br /&gt;The corporation had floated the scheme in January 2009 for sale of the land and only one bid was received from DLF in April 2009. The bidder was found to be technically qualified and its bid of Rs. 12,000 per square metre was opened. However, it made certain suggestions to make the project &amp;quot;financially viable&amp;quot;. The project parameters were re-examined and modified, allowing additional FAR at the rate of 20% of area to the successful bidder as per the decision taken by the then principal secretary, town and country planning, in July 2009. The project was re-advertised on July 20, 2009, and two additional bids from Country Heights Holdings, Berhad (Malayisa) and consortium led by Unitech Limited were received.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;While the technical bids were opened on August 12, 2009, HSIIDC rejected the bids submitted by Country Heights Holdings and Unitech Limited on the ground of their being &amp;quot;technically non-responsive&amp;quot; due to not fulfilling the minimum criteria and decided not to open their financial bids. The financial bid of DLF, which was the sole bidder left in the process, of Rs. 1,703 crore was accepted and subsequently approved by the state government. In February 2010, the developer was issued the regular letter of allotment for the land.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;In addition, the CAG is learnt to have examined the release of land from the acquisition process by the state government in favour of private developers and its licensing policy by way of a special audit of the town and country planning department, finding instances of &amp;quot;undue favour&amp;quot; and insufficient planning in some cases.&lt;/div&gt;&#039;
$lang = &#039;English&#039;
$SITE_URL = &#039;https://im4change.in/&#039;
$site_title = &#039;im4change&#039;
$adminprix = &#039;admin&#039;</pre><pre class="stack-trace">include - APP/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp, line 8
Cake\View\View::_evaluate() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 1413
Cake\View\View::_render() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 1374
Cake\View\View::renderLayout() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 927
Cake\View\View::render() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 885
Cake\Controller\Controller::render() - CORE/src/Controller/Controller.php, line 791
Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::_invoke() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 126
Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::dispatch() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 94
Cake\Http\BaseApplication::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/BaseApplication.php, line 235
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Routing\Middleware\RoutingMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/RoutingMiddleware.php, line 162
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Routing\Middleware\AssetMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/AssetMiddleware.php, line 88
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Error\Middleware\ErrorHandlerMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Error/Middleware/ErrorHandlerMiddleware.php, line 96
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Http\Runner::run() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 51</pre></div></pre>latest-news-updates/cag-questions-costing-of-350-acre-gurgaon-land-sold-to-dlf-navneet-sharma-19783.html"/>
    <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"/>
    <link href="https://im4change.in/css/control.css" rel="stylesheet" type="text/css"
          media="all"/>
    <title>LATEST NEWS UPDATES | CAG questions costing of 350-acre Gurgaon land sold to DLF -Navneet Sharma | Im4change.org</title>
    <meta name="description" content="
-The Hindustan Times

In what seems set to provide fresh ammo to its political rivals, the comptroller and auditor general (CAG) is learnt to have raised questions about the valuation of 350 acres given by the Haryana government to realty major..."/>
    <script src="https://im4change.in/js/jquery-1.10.2.js"></script>
    <script type="text/javascript" src="https://im4change.in/js/jquery-migrate.min.js"></script>
    <script language="javascript" type="text/javascript">

        $(document).ready(function () {
            var img = $("img")[0]; // Get my img elem
            var pic_real_width, pic_real_height;
            $("<img/>") // Make in memory copy of image to avoid css issues
                .attr("src", $(img).attr("src"))
                .load(function () {
                    pic_real_width = this.width;   // Note: $(this).width() will not
                    pic_real_height = this.height; // work for in memory images.
                });
        });
    </script>
    <style type="text/css">
        @media screen {
            div.divFooter {
                display: block;
            }
        }

        @media print {
            .printbutton {
                display: none !important;
            }
        }
    </style>
</head>
<body>
<table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" border="0" width="98%" align="center">
    <tr>
        <td class="top_bg">
            <div class="divFooter">
                <img src="https://im4change.in/images/logo1.jpg" height="59" border="0"
                     alt="Resource centre on India's rural distress" style="padding-top:14px;"/>
            </div>

        </td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
        <td id="topspace">&nbsp;</td>
    </tr>

    <tr id="topspace">
        <td>&nbsp;</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
        <td height="50" style="border-bottom:1px solid #000; padding-top:10px;" class="printbutton">
            <form><input type="button" value=" Print this page "
                         onclick="window.print();return false;"/></form>
        </td>
    </tr>

    <tr>
        <td width="100%">
            <h1 class="news_headlines" style="font-style:normal">
                <strong>CAG questions costing of 350-acre Gurgaon land sold to DLF -Navneet Sharma</strong></h1>
        </td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
        <td width="100%" style="font-family:Arial, 'Segoe Script', 'Segoe UI', sans-serif, serif"><font size="3">
                <div align="justify">-The Hindustan Times<br /><br />In what seems set to provide fresh ammo to its political rivals, the comptroller and auditor general (CAG) is learnt to have raised questions about the valuation of 350 acres given by the Haryana government to realty major DLF Limited in Gurgaon through competitive bidding for setting up a recreation-cum-leisure project.<br /><br />The CAG, which examined the procedures and the competitive bidding route taken by the Haryana State Industrial and Infrastructure Development Corporation (HSIIDC), found that the state-owned corporation had extended &quot;undue favour&quot; to DLF by transferring the forest land and selling the land below its market value and suffered a loss of Rs. 438 crore, besides allowing benefit of extra floor area ratio (FAR).<br /><br />FAR is the ratio of the total floor area of buildings to the size of the land or the limit imposed on such a ratio.<br /><br /><em>'Wrong valuation'<br /></em><br />The reserve price of the land was fixed on the lower side due to &quot;wrong costing&quot;, according to the findings conveyed by the auditors to HSIIDC in December 2012. Aam Aadmi Party convener Arvind Kejriwal and the opposition Indian National Lok Dal (INLD) have accused the Hooda Government in the past of &quot;favouring&quot; the developer in this deal. The state government and DLF had both vehemently denied the allegations at that time.<br /><br />However, the auditors are learnt to have pointed out now that ILFS Infrastructure Development Corporation Limited, consultant for assessment of land cost and preparation of handholding documents, had valued the land cost by using a mixed approach - multiplying average market rate of land with average district collector (DC) rate. The CAG report, according to sources, noted that the market rate for residential plots was 2.79 times more of average DC rate and average market rate for commercial plots was 3.105 times more of average DC rate, but the consultant ignored the actual market rates and took the factor of 1.8 times of average DC rates for reasons not available on record for valuation of residential land and factor of 3.12 times for valuation of commercial plots.<br /><br />&quot;The value of property considering factors adopted by the valuers worked out to Rs. 1,683 crore, whereas the valuation of property by considering correct average factors for residential area and commercial plots works out to Rs. 2,142 crore. However, the corporation in April 2008 approved the reserved price of the land at Rs. 1,700 crore on the basis of valuations without looking at the calculations,&quot; sources said, quoting the auditors' findings.<br /><br /><em>Sole bidder left<br /></em><br />The corporation had floated the scheme in January 2009 for sale of the land and only one bid was received from DLF in April 2009. The bidder was found to be technically qualified and its bid of Rs. 12,000 per square metre was opened. However, it made certain suggestions to make the project &quot;financially viable&quot;. The project parameters were re-examined and modified, allowing additional FAR at the rate of 20% of area to the successful bidder as per the decision taken by the then principal secretary, town and country planning, in July 2009. The project was re-advertised on July 20, 2009, and two additional bids from Country Heights Holdings, Berhad (Malayisa) and consortium led by Unitech Limited were received.<br /><br />While the technical bids were opened on August 12, 2009, HSIIDC rejected the bids submitted by Country Heights Holdings and Unitech Limited on the ground of their being &quot;technically non-responsive&quot; due to not fulfilling the minimum criteria and decided not to open their financial bids. The financial bid of DLF, which was the sole bidder left in the process, of Rs. 1,703 crore was accepted and subsequently approved by the state government. In February 2010, the developer was issued the regular letter of allotment for the land.<br /><br />In addition, the CAG is learnt to have examined the release of land from the acquisition process by the state government in favour of private developers and its licensing policy by way of a special audit of the town and country planning department, finding instances of &quot;undue favour&quot; and insufficient planning in some cases.</div>               </font>
        </td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
        <td>&nbsp;</td>
    </tr>

    <tr>
        <td height="50" style="border-top:1px solid #000; border-bottom:1px solid #000;padding-top:10px;">
            <form><input type="button" value=" Print this page "
                         onclick="window.print();return false;"/></form>
        </td>
    </tr>
</table></body>
</html>'

}
$maxBufferLength = (int) 8192
$file = '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Error/Debugger.php'
$line = (int) 853
$message = 'Unable to emit headers. Headers sent in file=/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Error/Debugger.php line=853'
Cake\Http\ResponseEmitter::emit() - CORE/src/Http/ResponseEmitter.php, line 48
Cake\Http\Server::emit() - CORE/src/Http/Server.php, line 141
[main] - ROOT/webroot/index.php, line 39

Warning (2): Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Error/Debugger.php:853) [CORE/src/Http/ResponseEmitter.php, line 148]
Code Context
            $response->getStatusCode(),

            ($reasonPhrase ? ' ' . $reasonPhrase : '')

        ));
$response = object(Cake\Http\Response) {

	'status' => (int) 200,
	'contentType' => 'text/html',
	'headers' => [
		'Content-Type' => [
			[maximum depth reached]
		]
	],
	'file' => null,
	'fileRange' => [],
	'cookies' => object(Cake\Http\Cookie\CookieCollection) {},
	'cacheDirectives' => [],
	'body' => '<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Transitional//EN"
        "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-transitional.dtd">
<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">
<head>
    <link rel="canonical" href="https://im4change.in/<pre class="cake-error"><a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="document.getElementById('cakeErr67ff040361de8-trace').style.display = (document.getElementById('cakeErr67ff040361de8-trace').style.display == 'none' ? '' : 'none');"><b>Notice</b> (8)</a>: Undefined variable: urlPrefix [<b>APP/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp</b>, line <b>8</b>]<div id="cakeErr67ff040361de8-trace" class="cake-stack-trace" style="display: none;"><a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="document.getElementById('cakeErr67ff040361de8-code').style.display = (document.getElementById('cakeErr67ff040361de8-code').style.display == 'none' ? '' : 'none')">Code</a> <a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="document.getElementById('cakeErr67ff040361de8-context').style.display = (document.getElementById('cakeErr67ff040361de8-context').style.display == 'none' ? '' : 'none')">Context</a><pre id="cakeErr67ff040361de8-code" class="cake-code-dump" style="display: none;"><code><span style="color: #000000"><span style="color: #0000BB"></span><span style="color: #007700">&lt;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">head</span><span style="color: #007700">&gt;
</span></span></code>
<span class="code-highlight"><code><span style="color: #000000">&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&lt;link&nbsp;rel="canonical"&nbsp;href="<span style="color: #0000BB">&lt;?php&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #007700">echo&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">Configure</span><span style="color: #007700">::</span><span style="color: #0000BB">read</span><span style="color: #007700">(</span><span style="color: #DD0000">'SITE_URL'</span><span style="color: #007700">);&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">?&gt;&lt;?php&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #007700">echo&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">$urlPrefix</span><span style="color: #007700">;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">?&gt;&lt;?php&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #007700">echo&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">$article_current</span><span style="color: #007700">-&gt;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">category</span><span style="color: #007700">-&gt;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">slug</span><span style="color: #007700">;&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">?&gt;</span>/<span style="color: #0000BB">&lt;?php&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #007700">echo&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">$article_current</span><span style="color: #007700">-&gt;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">seo_url</span><span style="color: #007700">;&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">?&gt;</span>.html"/&gt;
</span></code></span>
<code><span style="color: #000000"><span style="color: #0000BB">&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #007700">&lt;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">meta&nbsp;http</span><span style="color: #007700">-</span><span style="color: #0000BB">equiv</span><span style="color: #007700">=</span><span style="color: #DD0000">"Content-Type"&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">content</span><span style="color: #007700">=</span><span style="color: #DD0000">"text/html;&nbsp;charset=utf-8"</span><span style="color: #007700">/&gt;
</span></span></code></pre><pre id="cakeErr67ff040361de8-context" class="cake-context" style="display: none;">$viewFile = &#039;/home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp&#039;
$dataForView = [
	&#039;article_current&#039; =&gt; object(App\Model\Entity\Article) {

		&#039;id&#039; =&gt; (int) 19644,
		&#039;title&#039; =&gt; &#039;CAG questions costing of 350-acre Gurgaon land sold to DLF -Navneet Sharma&#039;,
		&#039;subheading&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
		&#039;description&#039; =&gt; &#039;&lt;div align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;
-The Hindustan Times&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
In what seems set to provide fresh ammo to its political rivals, the comptroller and auditor general (CAG) is learnt to have raised questions about the valuation of 350 acres given by the Haryana government to realty major DLF Limited in Gurgaon through competitive bidding for setting up a recreation-cum-leisure project.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The CAG, which examined the procedures and the competitive bidding route taken by the Haryana State Industrial and Infrastructure Development Corporation (HSIIDC), found that the state-owned corporation had extended &amp;quot;undue favour&amp;quot; to DLF by transferring the forest land and selling the land below its market value and suffered a loss of Rs. 438 crore, besides allowing benefit of extra floor area ratio (FAR).&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
FAR is the ratio of the total floor area of buildings to the size of the land or the limit imposed on such a ratio.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;em&gt;&#039;Wrong valuation&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;/em&gt;&lt;br /&gt;
The reserve price of the land was fixed on the lower side due to &amp;quot;wrong costing&amp;quot;, according to the findings conveyed by the auditors to HSIIDC in December 2012. Aam Aadmi Party convener Arvind Kejriwal and the opposition Indian National Lok Dal (INLD) have accused the Hooda Government in the past of &amp;quot;favouring&amp;quot; the developer in this deal. The state government and DLF had both vehemently denied the allegations at that time.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
However, the auditors are learnt to have pointed out now that ILFS Infrastructure Development Corporation Limited, consultant for assessment of land cost and preparation of handholding documents, had valued the land cost by using a mixed approach - multiplying average market rate of land with average district collector (DC) rate. The CAG report, according to sources, noted that the market rate for residential plots was 2.79 times more of average DC rate and average market rate for commercial plots was 3.105 times more of average DC rate, but the consultant ignored the actual market rates and took the factor of 1.8 times of average DC rates for reasons not available on record for valuation of residential land and factor of 3.12 times for valuation of commercial plots.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;quot;The value of property considering factors adopted by the valuers worked out to Rs. 1,683 crore, whereas the valuation of property by considering correct average factors for residential area and commercial plots works out to Rs. 2,142 crore. However, the corporation in April 2008 approved the reserved price of the land at Rs. 1,700 crore on the basis of valuations without looking at the calculations,&amp;quot; sources said, quoting the auditors&#039; findings.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;em&gt;Sole bidder left&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;/em&gt;&lt;br /&gt;
The corporation had floated the scheme in January 2009 for sale of the land and only one bid was received from DLF in April 2009. The bidder was found to be technically qualified and its bid of Rs. 12,000 per square metre was opened. However, it made certain suggestions to make the project &amp;quot;financially viable&amp;quot;. The project parameters were re-examined and modified, allowing additional FAR at the rate of 20% of area to the successful bidder as per the decision taken by the then principal secretary, town and country planning, in July 2009. The project was re-advertised on July 20, 2009, and two additional bids from Country Heights Holdings, Berhad (Malayisa) and consortium led by Unitech Limited were received.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
While the technical bids were opened on August 12, 2009, HSIIDC rejected the bids submitted by Country Heights Holdings and Unitech Limited on the ground of their being &amp;quot;technically non-responsive&amp;quot; due to not fulfilling the minimum criteria and decided not to open their financial bids. The financial bid of DLF, which was the sole bidder left in the process, of Rs. 1,703 crore was accepted and subsequently approved by the state government. In February 2010, the developer was issued the regular letter of allotment for the land.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
In addition, the CAG is learnt to have examined the release of land from the acquisition process by the state government in favour of private developers and its licensing policy by way of a special audit of the town and country planning department, finding instances of &amp;quot;undue favour&amp;quot; and insufficient planning in some cases.
&lt;/div&gt;&#039;,
		&#039;credit_writer&#039; =&gt; &#039;The Hindustan Times, 7 March, 2013, http://www.hindustantimes.com/Punjab/Chandigarh/CAG-questions-costing-of-350-acre-Gurgaon-land-sold-to-DLF/SP-Article1-1022494.aspx&#039;,
		&#039;article_img&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
		&#039;article_img_thumb&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
		&#039;status&#039; =&gt; (int) 1,
		&#039;show_on_home&#039; =&gt; (int) 1,
		&#039;lang&#039; =&gt; &#039;EN&#039;,
		&#039;category_id&#039; =&gt; (int) 16,
		&#039;tag_keyword&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
		&#039;seo_url&#039; =&gt; &#039;cag-questions-costing-of-350-acre-gurgaon-land-sold-to-dlf-navneet-sharma-19783&#039;,
		&#039;meta_title&#039; =&gt; null,
		&#039;meta_keywords&#039; =&gt; null,
		&#039;meta_description&#039; =&gt; null,
		&#039;noindex&#039; =&gt; (int) 0,
		&#039;publish_date&#039; =&gt; object(Cake\I18n\FrozenDate) {},
		&#039;most_visit_section_id&#039; =&gt; null,
		&#039;article_big_img&#039; =&gt; null,
		&#039;liveid&#039; =&gt; (int) 19783,
		&#039;created&#039; =&gt; object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {},
		&#039;modified&#039; =&gt; object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {},
		&#039;edate&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
		&#039;tags&#039; =&gt; [
			[maximum depth reached]
		],
		&#039;category&#039; =&gt; object(App\Model\Entity\Category) {},
		&#039;[new]&#039; =&gt; false,
		&#039;[accessible]&#039; =&gt; [
			[maximum depth reached]
		],
		&#039;[dirty]&#039; =&gt; [[maximum depth reached]],
		&#039;[original]&#039; =&gt; [[maximum depth reached]],
		&#039;[virtual]&#039; =&gt; [[maximum depth reached]],
		&#039;[hasErrors]&#039; =&gt; false,
		&#039;[errors]&#039; =&gt; [[maximum depth reached]],
		&#039;[invalid]&#039; =&gt; [[maximum depth reached]],
		&#039;[repository]&#039; =&gt; &#039;Articles&#039;
	
	},
	&#039;articleid&#039; =&gt; (int) 19644,
	&#039;metaTitle&#039; =&gt; &#039;LATEST NEWS UPDATES | CAG questions costing of 350-acre Gurgaon land sold to DLF -Navneet Sharma&#039;,
	&#039;metaKeywords&#039; =&gt; &#039;Comptroller and Auditor-General,CAG,Corruption,Land&#039;,
	&#039;metaDesc&#039; =&gt; &#039;
-The Hindustan Times

In what seems set to provide fresh ammo to its political rivals, the comptroller and auditor general (CAG) is learnt to have raised questions about the valuation of 350 acres given by the Haryana government to realty major...&#039;,
	&#039;disp&#039; =&gt; &#039;&lt;div align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;-The Hindustan Times&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;In what seems set to provide fresh ammo to its political rivals, the comptroller and auditor general (CAG) is learnt to have raised questions about the valuation of 350 acres given by the Haryana government to realty major DLF Limited in Gurgaon through competitive bidding for setting up a recreation-cum-leisure project.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;The CAG, which examined the procedures and the competitive bidding route taken by the Haryana State Industrial and Infrastructure Development Corporation (HSIIDC), found that the state-owned corporation had extended &amp;quot;undue favour&amp;quot; to DLF by transferring the forest land and selling the land below its market value and suffered a loss of Rs. 438 crore, besides allowing benefit of extra floor area ratio (FAR).&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;FAR is the ratio of the total floor area of buildings to the size of the land or the limit imposed on such a ratio.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;em&gt;&#039;Wrong valuation&#039;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/em&gt;&lt;br /&gt;The reserve price of the land was fixed on the lower side due to &amp;quot;wrong costing&amp;quot;, according to the findings conveyed by the auditors to HSIIDC in December 2012. Aam Aadmi Party convener Arvind Kejriwal and the opposition Indian National Lok Dal (INLD) have accused the Hooda Government in the past of &amp;quot;favouring&amp;quot; the developer in this deal. The state government and DLF had both vehemently denied the allegations at that time.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;However, the auditors are learnt to have pointed out now that ILFS Infrastructure Development Corporation Limited, consultant for assessment of land cost and preparation of handholding documents, had valued the land cost by using a mixed approach - multiplying average market rate of land with average district collector (DC) rate. The CAG report, according to sources, noted that the market rate for residential plots was 2.79 times more of average DC rate and average market rate for commercial plots was 3.105 times more of average DC rate, but the consultant ignored the actual market rates and took the factor of 1.8 times of average DC rates for reasons not available on record for valuation of residential land and factor of 3.12 times for valuation of commercial plots.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&amp;quot;The value of property considering factors adopted by the valuers worked out to Rs. 1,683 crore, whereas the valuation of property by considering correct average factors for residential area and commercial plots works out to Rs. 2,142 crore. However, the corporation in April 2008 approved the reserved price of the land at Rs. 1,700 crore on the basis of valuations without looking at the calculations,&amp;quot; sources said, quoting the auditors&#039; findings.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;em&gt;Sole bidder left&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/em&gt;&lt;br /&gt;The corporation had floated the scheme in January 2009 for sale of the land and only one bid was received from DLF in April 2009. The bidder was found to be technically qualified and its bid of Rs. 12,000 per square metre was opened. However, it made certain suggestions to make the project &amp;quot;financially viable&amp;quot;. The project parameters were re-examined and modified, allowing additional FAR at the rate of 20% of area to the successful bidder as per the decision taken by the then principal secretary, town and country planning, in July 2009. The project was re-advertised on July 20, 2009, and two additional bids from Country Heights Holdings, Berhad (Malayisa) and consortium led by Unitech Limited were received.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;While the technical bids were opened on August 12, 2009, HSIIDC rejected the bids submitted by Country Heights Holdings and Unitech Limited on the ground of their being &amp;quot;technically non-responsive&amp;quot; due to not fulfilling the minimum criteria and decided not to open their financial bids. The financial bid of DLF, which was the sole bidder left in the process, of Rs. 1,703 crore was accepted and subsequently approved by the state government. In February 2010, the developer was issued the regular letter of allotment for the land.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;In addition, the CAG is learnt to have examined the release of land from the acquisition process by the state government in favour of private developers and its licensing policy by way of a special audit of the town and country planning department, finding instances of &amp;quot;undue favour&amp;quot; and insufficient planning in some cases.&lt;/div&gt;&#039;,
	&#039;lang&#039; =&gt; &#039;English&#039;,
	&#039;SITE_URL&#039; =&gt; &#039;https://im4change.in/&#039;,
	&#039;site_title&#039; =&gt; &#039;im4change&#039;,
	&#039;adminprix&#039; =&gt; &#039;admin&#039;
]
$article_current = object(App\Model\Entity\Article) {

	&#039;id&#039; =&gt; (int) 19644,
	&#039;title&#039; =&gt; &#039;CAG questions costing of 350-acre Gurgaon land sold to DLF -Navneet Sharma&#039;,
	&#039;subheading&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
	&#039;description&#039; =&gt; &#039;&lt;div align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;
-The Hindustan Times&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
In what seems set to provide fresh ammo to its political rivals, the comptroller and auditor general (CAG) is learnt to have raised questions about the valuation of 350 acres given by the Haryana government to realty major DLF Limited in Gurgaon through competitive bidding for setting up a recreation-cum-leisure project.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The CAG, which examined the procedures and the competitive bidding route taken by the Haryana State Industrial and Infrastructure Development Corporation (HSIIDC), found that the state-owned corporation had extended &amp;quot;undue favour&amp;quot; to DLF by transferring the forest land and selling the land below its market value and suffered a loss of Rs. 438 crore, besides allowing benefit of extra floor area ratio (FAR).&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
FAR is the ratio of the total floor area of buildings to the size of the land or the limit imposed on such a ratio.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;em&gt;&#039;Wrong valuation&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;/em&gt;&lt;br /&gt;
The reserve price of the land was fixed on the lower side due to &amp;quot;wrong costing&amp;quot;, according to the findings conveyed by the auditors to HSIIDC in December 2012. Aam Aadmi Party convener Arvind Kejriwal and the opposition Indian National Lok Dal (INLD) have accused the Hooda Government in the past of &amp;quot;favouring&amp;quot; the developer in this deal. The state government and DLF had both vehemently denied the allegations at that time.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
However, the auditors are learnt to have pointed out now that ILFS Infrastructure Development Corporation Limited, consultant for assessment of land cost and preparation of handholding documents, had valued the land cost by using a mixed approach - multiplying average market rate of land with average district collector (DC) rate. The CAG report, according to sources, noted that the market rate for residential plots was 2.79 times more of average DC rate and average market rate for commercial plots was 3.105 times more of average DC rate, but the consultant ignored the actual market rates and took the factor of 1.8 times of average DC rates for reasons not available on record for valuation of residential land and factor of 3.12 times for valuation of commercial plots.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;quot;The value of property considering factors adopted by the valuers worked out to Rs. 1,683 crore, whereas the valuation of property by considering correct average factors for residential area and commercial plots works out to Rs. 2,142 crore. However, the corporation in April 2008 approved the reserved price of the land at Rs. 1,700 crore on the basis of valuations without looking at the calculations,&amp;quot; sources said, quoting the auditors&#039; findings.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;em&gt;Sole bidder left&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;/em&gt;&lt;br /&gt;
The corporation had floated the scheme in January 2009 for sale of the land and only one bid was received from DLF in April 2009. The bidder was found to be technically qualified and its bid of Rs. 12,000 per square metre was opened. However, it made certain suggestions to make the project &amp;quot;financially viable&amp;quot;. The project parameters were re-examined and modified, allowing additional FAR at the rate of 20% of area to the successful bidder as per the decision taken by the then principal secretary, town and country planning, in July 2009. The project was re-advertised on July 20, 2009, and two additional bids from Country Heights Holdings, Berhad (Malayisa) and consortium led by Unitech Limited were received.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
While the technical bids were opened on August 12, 2009, HSIIDC rejected the bids submitted by Country Heights Holdings and Unitech Limited on the ground of their being &amp;quot;technically non-responsive&amp;quot; due to not fulfilling the minimum criteria and decided not to open their financial bids. The financial bid of DLF, which was the sole bidder left in the process, of Rs. 1,703 crore was accepted and subsequently approved by the state government. In February 2010, the developer was issued the regular letter of allotment for the land.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
In addition, the CAG is learnt to have examined the release of land from the acquisition process by the state government in favour of private developers and its licensing policy by way of a special audit of the town and country planning department, finding instances of &amp;quot;undue favour&amp;quot; and insufficient planning in some cases.
&lt;/div&gt;&#039;,
	&#039;credit_writer&#039; =&gt; &#039;The Hindustan Times, 7 March, 2013, http://www.hindustantimes.com/Punjab/Chandigarh/CAG-questions-costing-of-350-acre-Gurgaon-land-sold-to-DLF/SP-Article1-1022494.aspx&#039;,
	&#039;article_img&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
	&#039;article_img_thumb&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
	&#039;status&#039; =&gt; (int) 1,
	&#039;show_on_home&#039; =&gt; (int) 1,
	&#039;lang&#039; =&gt; &#039;EN&#039;,
	&#039;category_id&#039; =&gt; (int) 16,
	&#039;tag_keyword&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
	&#039;seo_url&#039; =&gt; &#039;cag-questions-costing-of-350-acre-gurgaon-land-sold-to-dlf-navneet-sharma-19783&#039;,
	&#039;meta_title&#039; =&gt; null,
	&#039;meta_keywords&#039; =&gt; null,
	&#039;meta_description&#039; =&gt; null,
	&#039;noindex&#039; =&gt; (int) 0,
	&#039;publish_date&#039; =&gt; object(Cake\I18n\FrozenDate) {},
	&#039;most_visit_section_id&#039; =&gt; null,
	&#039;article_big_img&#039; =&gt; null,
	&#039;liveid&#039; =&gt; (int) 19783,
	&#039;created&#039; =&gt; object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {},
	&#039;modified&#039; =&gt; object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {},
	&#039;edate&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
	&#039;tags&#039; =&gt; [
		(int) 0 =&gt; object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {},
		(int) 1 =&gt; object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {},
		(int) 2 =&gt; object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {},
		(int) 3 =&gt; object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {}
	],
	&#039;category&#039; =&gt; object(App\Model\Entity\Category) {},
	&#039;[new]&#039; =&gt; false,
	&#039;[accessible]&#039; =&gt; [
		&#039;*&#039; =&gt; true,
		&#039;id&#039; =&gt; false
	],
	&#039;[dirty]&#039; =&gt; [],
	&#039;[original]&#039; =&gt; [],
	&#039;[virtual]&#039; =&gt; [],
	&#039;[hasErrors]&#039; =&gt; false,
	&#039;[errors]&#039; =&gt; [],
	&#039;[invalid]&#039; =&gt; [],
	&#039;[repository]&#039; =&gt; &#039;Articles&#039;

}
$articleid = (int) 19644
$metaTitle = &#039;LATEST NEWS UPDATES | CAG questions costing of 350-acre Gurgaon land sold to DLF -Navneet Sharma&#039;
$metaKeywords = &#039;Comptroller and Auditor-General,CAG,Corruption,Land&#039;
$metaDesc = &#039;
-The Hindustan Times

In what seems set to provide fresh ammo to its political rivals, the comptroller and auditor general (CAG) is learnt to have raised questions about the valuation of 350 acres given by the Haryana government to realty major...&#039;
$disp = &#039;&lt;div align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;-The Hindustan Times&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;In what seems set to provide fresh ammo to its political rivals, the comptroller and auditor general (CAG) is learnt to have raised questions about the valuation of 350 acres given by the Haryana government to realty major DLF Limited in Gurgaon through competitive bidding for setting up a recreation-cum-leisure project.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;The CAG, which examined the procedures and the competitive bidding route taken by the Haryana State Industrial and Infrastructure Development Corporation (HSIIDC), found that the state-owned corporation had extended &amp;quot;undue favour&amp;quot; to DLF by transferring the forest land and selling the land below its market value and suffered a loss of Rs. 438 crore, besides allowing benefit of extra floor area ratio (FAR).&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;FAR is the ratio of the total floor area of buildings to the size of the land or the limit imposed on such a ratio.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;em&gt;&#039;Wrong valuation&#039;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/em&gt;&lt;br /&gt;The reserve price of the land was fixed on the lower side due to &amp;quot;wrong costing&amp;quot;, according to the findings conveyed by the auditors to HSIIDC in December 2012. Aam Aadmi Party convener Arvind Kejriwal and the opposition Indian National Lok Dal (INLD) have accused the Hooda Government in the past of &amp;quot;favouring&amp;quot; the developer in this deal. The state government and DLF had both vehemently denied the allegations at that time.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;However, the auditors are learnt to have pointed out now that ILFS Infrastructure Development Corporation Limited, consultant for assessment of land cost and preparation of handholding documents, had valued the land cost by using a mixed approach - multiplying average market rate of land with average district collector (DC) rate. The CAG report, according to sources, noted that the market rate for residential plots was 2.79 times more of average DC rate and average market rate for commercial plots was 3.105 times more of average DC rate, but the consultant ignored the actual market rates and took the factor of 1.8 times of average DC rates for reasons not available on record for valuation of residential land and factor of 3.12 times for valuation of commercial plots.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&amp;quot;The value of property considering factors adopted by the valuers worked out to Rs. 1,683 crore, whereas the valuation of property by considering correct average factors for residential area and commercial plots works out to Rs. 2,142 crore. However, the corporation in April 2008 approved the reserved price of the land at Rs. 1,700 crore on the basis of valuations without looking at the calculations,&amp;quot; sources said, quoting the auditors&#039; findings.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;em&gt;Sole bidder left&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/em&gt;&lt;br /&gt;The corporation had floated the scheme in January 2009 for sale of the land and only one bid was received from DLF in April 2009. The bidder was found to be technically qualified and its bid of Rs. 12,000 per square metre was opened. However, it made certain suggestions to make the project &amp;quot;financially viable&amp;quot;. The project parameters were re-examined and modified, allowing additional FAR at the rate of 20% of area to the successful bidder as per the decision taken by the then principal secretary, town and country planning, in July 2009. The project was re-advertised on July 20, 2009, and two additional bids from Country Heights Holdings, Berhad (Malayisa) and consortium led by Unitech Limited were received.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;While the technical bids were opened on August 12, 2009, HSIIDC rejected the bids submitted by Country Heights Holdings and Unitech Limited on the ground of their being &amp;quot;technically non-responsive&amp;quot; due to not fulfilling the minimum criteria and decided not to open their financial bids. The financial bid of DLF, which was the sole bidder left in the process, of Rs. 1,703 crore was accepted and subsequently approved by the state government. In February 2010, the developer was issued the regular letter of allotment for the land.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;In addition, the CAG is learnt to have examined the release of land from the acquisition process by the state government in favour of private developers and its licensing policy by way of a special audit of the town and country planning department, finding instances of &amp;quot;undue favour&amp;quot; and insufficient planning in some cases.&lt;/div&gt;&#039;
$lang = &#039;English&#039;
$SITE_URL = &#039;https://im4change.in/&#039;
$site_title = &#039;im4change&#039;
$adminprix = &#039;admin&#039;</pre><pre class="stack-trace">include - APP/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp, line 8
Cake\View\View::_evaluate() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 1413
Cake\View\View::_render() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 1374
Cake\View\View::renderLayout() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 927
Cake\View\View::render() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 885
Cake\Controller\Controller::render() - CORE/src/Controller/Controller.php, line 791
Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::_invoke() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 126
Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::dispatch() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 94
Cake\Http\BaseApplication::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/BaseApplication.php, line 235
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Routing\Middleware\RoutingMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/RoutingMiddleware.php, line 162
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Routing\Middleware\AssetMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/AssetMiddleware.php, line 88
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Error\Middleware\ErrorHandlerMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Error/Middleware/ErrorHandlerMiddleware.php, line 96
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Http\Runner::run() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 51</pre></div></pre>latest-news-updates/cag-questions-costing-of-350-acre-gurgaon-land-sold-to-dlf-navneet-sharma-19783.html"/>
    <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"/>
    <link href="https://im4change.in/css/control.css" rel="stylesheet" type="text/css"
          media="all"/>
    <title>LATEST NEWS UPDATES | CAG questions costing of 350-acre Gurgaon land sold to DLF -Navneet Sharma | Im4change.org</title>
    <meta name="description" content="
-The Hindustan Times

In what seems set to provide fresh ammo to its political rivals, the comptroller and auditor general (CAG) is learnt to have raised questions about the valuation of 350 acres given by the Haryana government to realty major..."/>
    <script src="https://im4change.in/js/jquery-1.10.2.js"></script>
    <script type="text/javascript" src="https://im4change.in/js/jquery-migrate.min.js"></script>
    <script language="javascript" type="text/javascript">

        $(document).ready(function () {
            var img = $("img")[0]; // Get my img elem
            var pic_real_width, pic_real_height;
            $("<img/>") // Make in memory copy of image to avoid css issues
                .attr("src", $(img).attr("src"))
                .load(function () {
                    pic_real_width = this.width;   // Note: $(this).width() will not
                    pic_real_height = this.height; // work for in memory images.
                });
        });
    </script>
    <style type="text/css">
        @media screen {
            div.divFooter {
                display: block;
            }
        }

        @media print {
            .printbutton {
                display: none !important;
            }
        }
    </style>
</head>
<body>
<table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" border="0" width="98%" align="center">
    <tr>
        <td class="top_bg">
            <div class="divFooter">
                <img src="https://im4change.in/images/logo1.jpg" height="59" border="0"
                     alt="Resource centre on India's rural distress" style="padding-top:14px;"/>
            </div>

        </td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
        <td id="topspace">&nbsp;</td>
    </tr>

    <tr id="topspace">
        <td>&nbsp;</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
        <td height="50" style="border-bottom:1px solid #000; padding-top:10px;" class="printbutton">
            <form><input type="button" value=" Print this page "
                         onclick="window.print();return false;"/></form>
        </td>
    </tr>

    <tr>
        <td width="100%">
            <h1 class="news_headlines" style="font-style:normal">
                <strong>CAG questions costing of 350-acre Gurgaon land sold to DLF -Navneet Sharma</strong></h1>
        </td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
        <td width="100%" style="font-family:Arial, 'Segoe Script', 'Segoe UI', sans-serif, serif"><font size="3">
                <div align="justify">-The Hindustan Times<br /><br />In what seems set to provide fresh ammo to its political rivals, the comptroller and auditor general (CAG) is learnt to have raised questions about the valuation of 350 acres given by the Haryana government to realty major DLF Limited in Gurgaon through competitive bidding for setting up a recreation-cum-leisure project.<br /><br />The CAG, which examined the procedures and the competitive bidding route taken by the Haryana State Industrial and Infrastructure Development Corporation (HSIIDC), found that the state-owned corporation had extended &quot;undue favour&quot; to DLF by transferring the forest land and selling the land below its market value and suffered a loss of Rs. 438 crore, besides allowing benefit of extra floor area ratio (FAR).<br /><br />FAR is the ratio of the total floor area of buildings to the size of the land or the limit imposed on such a ratio.<br /><br /><em>'Wrong valuation'<br /></em><br />The reserve price of the land was fixed on the lower side due to &quot;wrong costing&quot;, according to the findings conveyed by the auditors to HSIIDC in December 2012. Aam Aadmi Party convener Arvind Kejriwal and the opposition Indian National Lok Dal (INLD) have accused the Hooda Government in the past of &quot;favouring&quot; the developer in this deal. The state government and DLF had both vehemently denied the allegations at that time.<br /><br />However, the auditors are learnt to have pointed out now that ILFS Infrastructure Development Corporation Limited, consultant for assessment of land cost and preparation of handholding documents, had valued the land cost by using a mixed approach - multiplying average market rate of land with average district collector (DC) rate. The CAG report, according to sources, noted that the market rate for residential plots was 2.79 times more of average DC rate and average market rate for commercial plots was 3.105 times more of average DC rate, but the consultant ignored the actual market rates and took the factor of 1.8 times of average DC rates for reasons not available on record for valuation of residential land and factor of 3.12 times for valuation of commercial plots.<br /><br />&quot;The value of property considering factors adopted by the valuers worked out to Rs. 1,683 crore, whereas the valuation of property by considering correct average factors for residential area and commercial plots works out to Rs. 2,142 crore. However, the corporation in April 2008 approved the reserved price of the land at Rs. 1,700 crore on the basis of valuations without looking at the calculations,&quot; sources said, quoting the auditors' findings.<br /><br /><em>Sole bidder left<br /></em><br />The corporation had floated the scheme in January 2009 for sale of the land and only one bid was received from DLF in April 2009. The bidder was found to be technically qualified and its bid of Rs. 12,000 per square metre was opened. However, it made certain suggestions to make the project &quot;financially viable&quot;. The project parameters were re-examined and modified, allowing additional FAR at the rate of 20% of area to the successful bidder as per the decision taken by the then principal secretary, town and country planning, in July 2009. The project was re-advertised on July 20, 2009, and two additional bids from Country Heights Holdings, Berhad (Malayisa) and consortium led by Unitech Limited were received.<br /><br />While the technical bids were opened on August 12, 2009, HSIIDC rejected the bids submitted by Country Heights Holdings and Unitech Limited on the ground of their being &quot;technically non-responsive&quot; due to not fulfilling the minimum criteria and decided not to open their financial bids. The financial bid of DLF, which was the sole bidder left in the process, of Rs. 1,703 crore was accepted and subsequently approved by the state government. In February 2010, the developer was issued the regular letter of allotment for the land.<br /><br />In addition, the CAG is learnt to have examined the release of land from the acquisition process by the state government in favour of private developers and its licensing policy by way of a special audit of the town and country planning department, finding instances of &quot;undue favour&quot; and insufficient planning in some cases.</div>               </font>
        </td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
        <td>&nbsp;</td>
    </tr>

    <tr>
        <td height="50" style="border-top:1px solid #000; border-bottom:1px solid #000;padding-top:10px;">
            <form><input type="button" value=" Print this page "
                         onclick="window.print();return false;"/></form>
        </td>
    </tr>
</table></body>
</html>'

}
$reasonPhrase = 'OK'
header - [internal], line ??
Cake\Http\ResponseEmitter::emitStatusLine() - CORE/src/Http/ResponseEmitter.php, line 148
Cake\Http\ResponseEmitter::emit() - CORE/src/Http/ResponseEmitter.php, line 54
Cake\Http\Server::emit() - CORE/src/Http/Server.php, line 141
[main] - ROOT/webroot/index.php, line 39

Warning (2): Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Error/Debugger.php:853) [CORE/src/Http/ResponseEmitter.php, line 181]
Code Context
                    $value

                ), $first);

                $first = false;
$response = object(Cake\Http\Response) {

	'status' => (int) 200,
	'contentType' => 'text/html',
	'headers' => [
		'Content-Type' => [
			[maximum depth reached]
		]
	],
	'file' => null,
	'fileRange' => [],
	'cookies' => object(Cake\Http\Cookie\CookieCollection) {},
	'cacheDirectives' => [],
	'body' => '<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Transitional//EN"
        "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-transitional.dtd">
<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">
<head>
    <link rel="canonical" href="https://im4change.in/<pre class="cake-error"><a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="document.getElementById('cakeErr67ff040361de8-trace').style.display = (document.getElementById('cakeErr67ff040361de8-trace').style.display == 'none' ? '' : 'none');"><b>Notice</b> (8)</a>: Undefined variable: urlPrefix [<b>APP/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp</b>, line <b>8</b>]<div id="cakeErr67ff040361de8-trace" class="cake-stack-trace" style="display: none;"><a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="document.getElementById('cakeErr67ff040361de8-code').style.display = (document.getElementById('cakeErr67ff040361de8-code').style.display == 'none' ? '' : 'none')">Code</a> <a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="document.getElementById('cakeErr67ff040361de8-context').style.display = (document.getElementById('cakeErr67ff040361de8-context').style.display == 'none' ? '' : 'none')">Context</a><pre id="cakeErr67ff040361de8-code" class="cake-code-dump" style="display: none;"><code><span style="color: #000000"><span style="color: #0000BB"></span><span style="color: #007700">&lt;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">head</span><span style="color: #007700">&gt;
</span></span></code>
<span class="code-highlight"><code><span style="color: #000000">&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&lt;link&nbsp;rel="canonical"&nbsp;href="<span style="color: #0000BB">&lt;?php&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #007700">echo&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">Configure</span><span style="color: #007700">::</span><span style="color: #0000BB">read</span><span style="color: #007700">(</span><span style="color: #DD0000">'SITE_URL'</span><span style="color: #007700">);&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">?&gt;&lt;?php&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #007700">echo&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">$urlPrefix</span><span style="color: #007700">;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">?&gt;&lt;?php&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #007700">echo&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">$article_current</span><span style="color: #007700">-&gt;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">category</span><span style="color: #007700">-&gt;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">slug</span><span style="color: #007700">;&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">?&gt;</span>/<span style="color: #0000BB">&lt;?php&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #007700">echo&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">$article_current</span><span style="color: #007700">-&gt;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">seo_url</span><span style="color: #007700">;&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">?&gt;</span>.html"/&gt;
</span></code></span>
<code><span style="color: #000000"><span style="color: #0000BB">&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #007700">&lt;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">meta&nbsp;http</span><span style="color: #007700">-</span><span style="color: #0000BB">equiv</span><span style="color: #007700">=</span><span style="color: #DD0000">"Content-Type"&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">content</span><span style="color: #007700">=</span><span style="color: #DD0000">"text/html;&nbsp;charset=utf-8"</span><span style="color: #007700">/&gt;
</span></span></code></pre><pre id="cakeErr67ff040361de8-context" class="cake-context" style="display: none;">$viewFile = &#039;/home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp&#039;
$dataForView = [
	&#039;article_current&#039; =&gt; object(App\Model\Entity\Article) {

		&#039;id&#039; =&gt; (int) 19644,
		&#039;title&#039; =&gt; &#039;CAG questions costing of 350-acre Gurgaon land sold to DLF -Navneet Sharma&#039;,
		&#039;subheading&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
		&#039;description&#039; =&gt; &#039;&lt;div align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;
-The Hindustan Times&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
In what seems set to provide fresh ammo to its political rivals, the comptroller and auditor general (CAG) is learnt to have raised questions about the valuation of 350 acres given by the Haryana government to realty major DLF Limited in Gurgaon through competitive bidding for setting up a recreation-cum-leisure project.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The CAG, which examined the procedures and the competitive bidding route taken by the Haryana State Industrial and Infrastructure Development Corporation (HSIIDC), found that the state-owned corporation had extended &amp;quot;undue favour&amp;quot; to DLF by transferring the forest land and selling the land below its market value and suffered a loss of Rs. 438 crore, besides allowing benefit of extra floor area ratio (FAR).&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
FAR is the ratio of the total floor area of buildings to the size of the land or the limit imposed on such a ratio.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;em&gt;&#039;Wrong valuation&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;/em&gt;&lt;br /&gt;
The reserve price of the land was fixed on the lower side due to &amp;quot;wrong costing&amp;quot;, according to the findings conveyed by the auditors to HSIIDC in December 2012. Aam Aadmi Party convener Arvind Kejriwal and the opposition Indian National Lok Dal (INLD) have accused the Hooda Government in the past of &amp;quot;favouring&amp;quot; the developer in this deal. The state government and DLF had both vehemently denied the allegations at that time.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
However, the auditors are learnt to have pointed out now that ILFS Infrastructure Development Corporation Limited, consultant for assessment of land cost and preparation of handholding documents, had valued the land cost by using a mixed approach - multiplying average market rate of land with average district collector (DC) rate. The CAG report, according to sources, noted that the market rate for residential plots was 2.79 times more of average DC rate and average market rate for commercial plots was 3.105 times more of average DC rate, but the consultant ignored the actual market rates and took the factor of 1.8 times of average DC rates for reasons not available on record for valuation of residential land and factor of 3.12 times for valuation of commercial plots.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;quot;The value of property considering factors adopted by the valuers worked out to Rs. 1,683 crore, whereas the valuation of property by considering correct average factors for residential area and commercial plots works out to Rs. 2,142 crore. However, the corporation in April 2008 approved the reserved price of the land at Rs. 1,700 crore on the basis of valuations without looking at the calculations,&amp;quot; sources said, quoting the auditors&#039; findings.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;em&gt;Sole bidder left&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;/em&gt;&lt;br /&gt;
The corporation had floated the scheme in January 2009 for sale of the land and only one bid was received from DLF in April 2009. The bidder was found to be technically qualified and its bid of Rs. 12,000 per square metre was opened. However, it made certain suggestions to make the project &amp;quot;financially viable&amp;quot;. The project parameters were re-examined and modified, allowing additional FAR at the rate of 20% of area to the successful bidder as per the decision taken by the then principal secretary, town and country planning, in July 2009. The project was re-advertised on July 20, 2009, and two additional bids from Country Heights Holdings, Berhad (Malayisa) and consortium led by Unitech Limited were received.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
While the technical bids were opened on August 12, 2009, HSIIDC rejected the bids submitted by Country Heights Holdings and Unitech Limited on the ground of their being &amp;quot;technically non-responsive&amp;quot; due to not fulfilling the minimum criteria and decided not to open their financial bids. The financial bid of DLF, which was the sole bidder left in the process, of Rs. 1,703 crore was accepted and subsequently approved by the state government. In February 2010, the developer was issued the regular letter of allotment for the land.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
In addition, the CAG is learnt to have examined the release of land from the acquisition process by the state government in favour of private developers and its licensing policy by way of a special audit of the town and country planning department, finding instances of &amp;quot;undue favour&amp;quot; and insufficient planning in some cases.
&lt;/div&gt;&#039;,
		&#039;credit_writer&#039; =&gt; &#039;The Hindustan Times, 7 March, 2013, http://www.hindustantimes.com/Punjab/Chandigarh/CAG-questions-costing-of-350-acre-Gurgaon-land-sold-to-DLF/SP-Article1-1022494.aspx&#039;,
		&#039;article_img&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
		&#039;article_img_thumb&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
		&#039;status&#039; =&gt; (int) 1,
		&#039;show_on_home&#039; =&gt; (int) 1,
		&#039;lang&#039; =&gt; &#039;EN&#039;,
		&#039;category_id&#039; =&gt; (int) 16,
		&#039;tag_keyword&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
		&#039;seo_url&#039; =&gt; &#039;cag-questions-costing-of-350-acre-gurgaon-land-sold-to-dlf-navneet-sharma-19783&#039;,
		&#039;meta_title&#039; =&gt; null,
		&#039;meta_keywords&#039; =&gt; null,
		&#039;meta_description&#039; =&gt; null,
		&#039;noindex&#039; =&gt; (int) 0,
		&#039;publish_date&#039; =&gt; object(Cake\I18n\FrozenDate) {},
		&#039;most_visit_section_id&#039; =&gt; null,
		&#039;article_big_img&#039; =&gt; null,
		&#039;liveid&#039; =&gt; (int) 19783,
		&#039;created&#039; =&gt; object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {},
		&#039;modified&#039; =&gt; object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {},
		&#039;edate&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
		&#039;tags&#039; =&gt; [
			[maximum depth reached]
		],
		&#039;category&#039; =&gt; object(App\Model\Entity\Category) {},
		&#039;[new]&#039; =&gt; false,
		&#039;[accessible]&#039; =&gt; [
			[maximum depth reached]
		],
		&#039;[dirty]&#039; =&gt; [[maximum depth reached]],
		&#039;[original]&#039; =&gt; [[maximum depth reached]],
		&#039;[virtual]&#039; =&gt; [[maximum depth reached]],
		&#039;[hasErrors]&#039; =&gt; false,
		&#039;[errors]&#039; =&gt; [[maximum depth reached]],
		&#039;[invalid]&#039; =&gt; [[maximum depth reached]],
		&#039;[repository]&#039; =&gt; &#039;Articles&#039;
	
	},
	&#039;articleid&#039; =&gt; (int) 19644,
	&#039;metaTitle&#039; =&gt; &#039;LATEST NEWS UPDATES | CAG questions costing of 350-acre Gurgaon land sold to DLF -Navneet Sharma&#039;,
	&#039;metaKeywords&#039; =&gt; &#039;Comptroller and Auditor-General,CAG,Corruption,Land&#039;,
	&#039;metaDesc&#039; =&gt; &#039;
-The Hindustan Times

In what seems set to provide fresh ammo to its political rivals, the comptroller and auditor general (CAG) is learnt to have raised questions about the valuation of 350 acres given by the Haryana government to realty major...&#039;,
	&#039;disp&#039; =&gt; &#039;&lt;div align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;-The Hindustan Times&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;In what seems set to provide fresh ammo to its political rivals, the comptroller and auditor general (CAG) is learnt to have raised questions about the valuation of 350 acres given by the Haryana government to realty major DLF Limited in Gurgaon through competitive bidding for setting up a recreation-cum-leisure project.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;The CAG, which examined the procedures and the competitive bidding route taken by the Haryana State Industrial and Infrastructure Development Corporation (HSIIDC), found that the state-owned corporation had extended &amp;quot;undue favour&amp;quot; to DLF by transferring the forest land and selling the land below its market value and suffered a loss of Rs. 438 crore, besides allowing benefit of extra floor area ratio (FAR).&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;FAR is the ratio of the total floor area of buildings to the size of the land or the limit imposed on such a ratio.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;em&gt;&#039;Wrong valuation&#039;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/em&gt;&lt;br /&gt;The reserve price of the land was fixed on the lower side due to &amp;quot;wrong costing&amp;quot;, according to the findings conveyed by the auditors to HSIIDC in December 2012. Aam Aadmi Party convener Arvind Kejriwal and the opposition Indian National Lok Dal (INLD) have accused the Hooda Government in the past of &amp;quot;favouring&amp;quot; the developer in this deal. The state government and DLF had both vehemently denied the allegations at that time.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;However, the auditors are learnt to have pointed out now that ILFS Infrastructure Development Corporation Limited, consultant for assessment of land cost and preparation of handholding documents, had valued the land cost by using a mixed approach - multiplying average market rate of land with average district collector (DC) rate. The CAG report, according to sources, noted that the market rate for residential plots was 2.79 times more of average DC rate and average market rate for commercial plots was 3.105 times more of average DC rate, but the consultant ignored the actual market rates and took the factor of 1.8 times of average DC rates for reasons not available on record for valuation of residential land and factor of 3.12 times for valuation of commercial plots.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&amp;quot;The value of property considering factors adopted by the valuers worked out to Rs. 1,683 crore, whereas the valuation of property by considering correct average factors for residential area and commercial plots works out to Rs. 2,142 crore. However, the corporation in April 2008 approved the reserved price of the land at Rs. 1,700 crore on the basis of valuations without looking at the calculations,&amp;quot; sources said, quoting the auditors&#039; findings.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;em&gt;Sole bidder left&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/em&gt;&lt;br /&gt;The corporation had floated the scheme in January 2009 for sale of the land and only one bid was received from DLF in April 2009. The bidder was found to be technically qualified and its bid of Rs. 12,000 per square metre was opened. However, it made certain suggestions to make the project &amp;quot;financially viable&amp;quot;. The project parameters were re-examined and modified, allowing additional FAR at the rate of 20% of area to the successful bidder as per the decision taken by the then principal secretary, town and country planning, in July 2009. The project was re-advertised on July 20, 2009, and two additional bids from Country Heights Holdings, Berhad (Malayisa) and consortium led by Unitech Limited were received.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;While the technical bids were opened on August 12, 2009, HSIIDC rejected the bids submitted by Country Heights Holdings and Unitech Limited on the ground of their being &amp;quot;technically non-responsive&amp;quot; due to not fulfilling the minimum criteria and decided not to open their financial bids. The financial bid of DLF, which was the sole bidder left in the process, of Rs. 1,703 crore was accepted and subsequently approved by the state government. In February 2010, the developer was issued the regular letter of allotment for the land.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;In addition, the CAG is learnt to have examined the release of land from the acquisition process by the state government in favour of private developers and its licensing policy by way of a special audit of the town and country planning department, finding instances of &amp;quot;undue favour&amp;quot; and insufficient planning in some cases.&lt;/div&gt;&#039;,
	&#039;lang&#039; =&gt; &#039;English&#039;,
	&#039;SITE_URL&#039; =&gt; &#039;https://im4change.in/&#039;,
	&#039;site_title&#039; =&gt; &#039;im4change&#039;,
	&#039;adminprix&#039; =&gt; &#039;admin&#039;
]
$article_current = object(App\Model\Entity\Article) {

	&#039;id&#039; =&gt; (int) 19644,
	&#039;title&#039; =&gt; &#039;CAG questions costing of 350-acre Gurgaon land sold to DLF -Navneet Sharma&#039;,
	&#039;subheading&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
	&#039;description&#039; =&gt; &#039;&lt;div align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;
-The Hindustan Times&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
In what seems set to provide fresh ammo to its political rivals, the comptroller and auditor general (CAG) is learnt to have raised questions about the valuation of 350 acres given by the Haryana government to realty major DLF Limited in Gurgaon through competitive bidding for setting up a recreation-cum-leisure project.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The CAG, which examined the procedures and the competitive bidding route taken by the Haryana State Industrial and Infrastructure Development Corporation (HSIIDC), found that the state-owned corporation had extended &amp;quot;undue favour&amp;quot; to DLF by transferring the forest land and selling the land below its market value and suffered a loss of Rs. 438 crore, besides allowing benefit of extra floor area ratio (FAR).&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
FAR is the ratio of the total floor area of buildings to the size of the land or the limit imposed on such a ratio.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;em&gt;&#039;Wrong valuation&#039;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;/em&gt;&lt;br /&gt;
The reserve price of the land was fixed on the lower side due to &amp;quot;wrong costing&amp;quot;, according to the findings conveyed by the auditors to HSIIDC in December 2012. Aam Aadmi Party convener Arvind Kejriwal and the opposition Indian National Lok Dal (INLD) have accused the Hooda Government in the past of &amp;quot;favouring&amp;quot; the developer in this deal. The state government and DLF had both vehemently denied the allegations at that time.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
However, the auditors are learnt to have pointed out now that ILFS Infrastructure Development Corporation Limited, consultant for assessment of land cost and preparation of handholding documents, had valued the land cost by using a mixed approach - multiplying average market rate of land with average district collector (DC) rate. The CAG report, according to sources, noted that the market rate for residential plots was 2.79 times more of average DC rate and average market rate for commercial plots was 3.105 times more of average DC rate, but the consultant ignored the actual market rates and took the factor of 1.8 times of average DC rates for reasons not available on record for valuation of residential land and factor of 3.12 times for valuation of commercial plots.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;quot;The value of property considering factors adopted by the valuers worked out to Rs. 1,683 crore, whereas the valuation of property by considering correct average factors for residential area and commercial plots works out to Rs. 2,142 crore. However, the corporation in April 2008 approved the reserved price of the land at Rs. 1,700 crore on the basis of valuations without looking at the calculations,&amp;quot; sources said, quoting the auditors&#039; findings.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;em&gt;Sole bidder left&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;/em&gt;&lt;br /&gt;
The corporation had floated the scheme in January 2009 for sale of the land and only one bid was received from DLF in April 2009. The bidder was found to be technically qualified and its bid of Rs. 12,000 per square metre was opened. However, it made certain suggestions to make the project &amp;quot;financially viable&amp;quot;. The project parameters were re-examined and modified, allowing additional FAR at the rate of 20% of area to the successful bidder as per the decision taken by the then principal secretary, town and country planning, in July 2009. The project was re-advertised on July 20, 2009, and two additional bids from Country Heights Holdings, Berhad (Malayisa) and consortium led by Unitech Limited were received.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
While the technical bids were opened on August 12, 2009, HSIIDC rejected the bids submitted by Country Heights Holdings and Unitech Limited on the ground of their being &amp;quot;technically non-responsive&amp;quot; due to not fulfilling the minimum criteria and decided not to open their financial bids. The financial bid of DLF, which was the sole bidder left in the process, of Rs. 1,703 crore was accepted and subsequently approved by the state government. In February 2010, the developer was issued the regular letter of allotment for the land.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
In addition, the CAG is learnt to have examined the release of land from the acquisition process by the state government in favour of private developers and its licensing policy by way of a special audit of the town and country planning department, finding instances of &amp;quot;undue favour&amp;quot; and insufficient planning in some cases.
&lt;/div&gt;&#039;,
	&#039;credit_writer&#039; =&gt; &#039;The Hindustan Times, 7 March, 2013, http://www.hindustantimes.com/Punjab/Chandigarh/CAG-questions-costing-of-350-acre-Gurgaon-land-sold-to-DLF/SP-Article1-1022494.aspx&#039;,
	&#039;article_img&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
	&#039;article_img_thumb&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
	&#039;status&#039; =&gt; (int) 1,
	&#039;show_on_home&#039; =&gt; (int) 1,
	&#039;lang&#039; =&gt; &#039;EN&#039;,
	&#039;category_id&#039; =&gt; (int) 16,
	&#039;tag_keyword&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
	&#039;seo_url&#039; =&gt; &#039;cag-questions-costing-of-350-acre-gurgaon-land-sold-to-dlf-navneet-sharma-19783&#039;,
	&#039;meta_title&#039; =&gt; null,
	&#039;meta_keywords&#039; =&gt; null,
	&#039;meta_description&#039; =&gt; null,
	&#039;noindex&#039; =&gt; (int) 0,
	&#039;publish_date&#039; =&gt; object(Cake\I18n\FrozenDate) {},
	&#039;most_visit_section_id&#039; =&gt; null,
	&#039;article_big_img&#039; =&gt; null,
	&#039;liveid&#039; =&gt; (int) 19783,
	&#039;created&#039; =&gt; object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {},
	&#039;modified&#039; =&gt; object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {},
	&#039;edate&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
	&#039;tags&#039; =&gt; [
		(int) 0 =&gt; object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {},
		(int) 1 =&gt; object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {},
		(int) 2 =&gt; object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {},
		(int) 3 =&gt; object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {}
	],
	&#039;category&#039; =&gt; object(App\Model\Entity\Category) {},
	&#039;[new]&#039; =&gt; false,
	&#039;[accessible]&#039; =&gt; [
		&#039;*&#039; =&gt; true,
		&#039;id&#039; =&gt; false
	],
	&#039;[dirty]&#039; =&gt; [],
	&#039;[original]&#039; =&gt; [],
	&#039;[virtual]&#039; =&gt; [],
	&#039;[hasErrors]&#039; =&gt; false,
	&#039;[errors]&#039; =&gt; [],
	&#039;[invalid]&#039; =&gt; [],
	&#039;[repository]&#039; =&gt; &#039;Articles&#039;

}
$articleid = (int) 19644
$metaTitle = &#039;LATEST NEWS UPDATES | CAG questions costing of 350-acre Gurgaon land sold to DLF -Navneet Sharma&#039;
$metaKeywords = &#039;Comptroller and Auditor-General,CAG,Corruption,Land&#039;
$metaDesc = &#039;
-The Hindustan Times

In what seems set to provide fresh ammo to its political rivals, the comptroller and auditor general (CAG) is learnt to have raised questions about the valuation of 350 acres given by the Haryana government to realty major...&#039;
$disp = &#039;&lt;div align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;-The Hindustan Times&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;In what seems set to provide fresh ammo to its political rivals, the comptroller and auditor general (CAG) is learnt to have raised questions about the valuation of 350 acres given by the Haryana government to realty major DLF Limited in Gurgaon through competitive bidding for setting up a recreation-cum-leisure project.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;The CAG, which examined the procedures and the competitive bidding route taken by the Haryana State Industrial and Infrastructure Development Corporation (HSIIDC), found that the state-owned corporation had extended &amp;quot;undue favour&amp;quot; to DLF by transferring the forest land and selling the land below its market value and suffered a loss of Rs. 438 crore, besides allowing benefit of extra floor area ratio (FAR).&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;FAR is the ratio of the total floor area of buildings to the size of the land or the limit imposed on such a ratio.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;em&gt;&#039;Wrong valuation&#039;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/em&gt;&lt;br /&gt;The reserve price of the land was fixed on the lower side due to &amp;quot;wrong costing&amp;quot;, according to the findings conveyed by the auditors to HSIIDC in December 2012. Aam Aadmi Party convener Arvind Kejriwal and the opposition Indian National Lok Dal (INLD) have accused the Hooda Government in the past of &amp;quot;favouring&amp;quot; the developer in this deal. The state government and DLF had both vehemently denied the allegations at that time.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;However, the auditors are learnt to have pointed out now that ILFS Infrastructure Development Corporation Limited, consultant for assessment of land cost and preparation of handholding documents, had valued the land cost by using a mixed approach - multiplying average market rate of land with average district collector (DC) rate. The CAG report, according to sources, noted that the market rate for residential plots was 2.79 times more of average DC rate and average market rate for commercial plots was 3.105 times more of average DC rate, but the consultant ignored the actual market rates and took the factor of 1.8 times of average DC rates for reasons not available on record for valuation of residential land and factor of 3.12 times for valuation of commercial plots.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&amp;quot;The value of property considering factors adopted by the valuers worked out to Rs. 1,683 crore, whereas the valuation of property by considering correct average factors for residential area and commercial plots works out to Rs. 2,142 crore. However, the corporation in April 2008 approved the reserved price of the land at Rs. 1,700 crore on the basis of valuations without looking at the calculations,&amp;quot; sources said, quoting the auditors&#039; findings.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;em&gt;Sole bidder left&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/em&gt;&lt;br /&gt;The corporation had floated the scheme in January 2009 for sale of the land and only one bid was received from DLF in April 2009. The bidder was found to be technically qualified and its bid of Rs. 12,000 per square metre was opened. However, it made certain suggestions to make the project &amp;quot;financially viable&amp;quot;. The project parameters were re-examined and modified, allowing additional FAR at the rate of 20% of area to the successful bidder as per the decision taken by the then principal secretary, town and country planning, in July 2009. The project was re-advertised on July 20, 2009, and two additional bids from Country Heights Holdings, Berhad (Malayisa) and consortium led by Unitech Limited were received.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;While the technical bids were opened on August 12, 2009, HSIIDC rejected the bids submitted by Country Heights Holdings and Unitech Limited on the ground of their being &amp;quot;technically non-responsive&amp;quot; due to not fulfilling the minimum criteria and decided not to open their financial bids. The financial bid of DLF, which was the sole bidder left in the process, of Rs. 1,703 crore was accepted and subsequently approved by the state government. In February 2010, the developer was issued the regular letter of allotment for the land.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;In addition, the CAG is learnt to have examined the release of land from the acquisition process by the state government in favour of private developers and its licensing policy by way of a special audit of the town and country planning department, finding instances of &amp;quot;undue favour&amp;quot; and insufficient planning in some cases.&lt;/div&gt;&#039;
$lang = &#039;English&#039;
$SITE_URL = &#039;https://im4change.in/&#039;
$site_title = &#039;im4change&#039;
$adminprix = &#039;admin&#039;</pre><pre class="stack-trace">include - APP/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp, line 8
Cake\View\View::_evaluate() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 1413
Cake\View\View::_render() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 1374
Cake\View\View::renderLayout() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 927
Cake\View\View::render() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 885
Cake\Controller\Controller::render() - CORE/src/Controller/Controller.php, line 791
Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::_invoke() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 126
Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::dispatch() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 94
Cake\Http\BaseApplication::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/BaseApplication.php, line 235
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Routing\Middleware\RoutingMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/RoutingMiddleware.php, line 162
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Routing\Middleware\AssetMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/AssetMiddleware.php, line 88
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Error\Middleware\ErrorHandlerMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Error/Middleware/ErrorHandlerMiddleware.php, line 96
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Http\Runner::run() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 51</pre></div></pre>latest-news-updates/cag-questions-costing-of-350-acre-gurgaon-land-sold-to-dlf-navneet-sharma-19783.html"/>
    <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"/>
    <link href="https://im4change.in/css/control.css" rel="stylesheet" type="text/css"
          media="all"/>
    <title>LATEST NEWS UPDATES | CAG questions costing of 350-acre Gurgaon land sold to DLF -Navneet Sharma | Im4change.org</title>
    <meta name="description" content="
-The Hindustan Times

In what seems set to provide fresh ammo to its political rivals, the comptroller and auditor general (CAG) is learnt to have raised questions about the valuation of 350 acres given by the Haryana government to realty major..."/>
    <script src="https://im4change.in/js/jquery-1.10.2.js"></script>
    <script type="text/javascript" src="https://im4change.in/js/jquery-migrate.min.js"></script>
    <script language="javascript" type="text/javascript">

        $(document).ready(function () {
            var img = $("img")[0]; // Get my img elem
            var pic_real_width, pic_real_height;
            $("<img/>") // Make in memory copy of image to avoid css issues
                .attr("src", $(img).attr("src"))
                .load(function () {
                    pic_real_width = this.width;   // Note: $(this).width() will not
                    pic_real_height = this.height; // work for in memory images.
                });
        });
    </script>
    <style type="text/css">
        @media screen {
            div.divFooter {
                display: block;
            }
        }

        @media print {
            .printbutton {
                display: none !important;
            }
        }
    </style>
</head>
<body>
<table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" border="0" width="98%" align="center">
    <tr>
        <td class="top_bg">
            <div class="divFooter">
                <img src="https://im4change.in/images/logo1.jpg" height="59" border="0"
                     alt="Resource centre on India's rural distress" style="padding-top:14px;"/>
            </div>

        </td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
        <td id="topspace">&nbsp;</td>
    </tr>

    <tr id="topspace">
        <td>&nbsp;</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
        <td height="50" style="border-bottom:1px solid #000; padding-top:10px;" class="printbutton">
            <form><input type="button" value=" Print this page "
                         onclick="window.print();return false;"/></form>
        </td>
    </tr>

    <tr>
        <td width="100%">
            <h1 class="news_headlines" style="font-style:normal">
                <strong>CAG questions costing of 350-acre Gurgaon land sold to DLF -Navneet Sharma</strong></h1>
        </td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
        <td width="100%" style="font-family:Arial, 'Segoe Script', 'Segoe UI', sans-serif, serif"><font size="3">
                <div align="justify">-The Hindustan Times<br /><br />In what seems set to provide fresh ammo to its political rivals, the comptroller and auditor general (CAG) is learnt to have raised questions about the valuation of 350 acres given by the Haryana government to realty major DLF Limited in Gurgaon through competitive bidding for setting up a recreation-cum-leisure project.<br /><br />The CAG, which examined the procedures and the competitive bidding route taken by the Haryana State Industrial and Infrastructure Development Corporation (HSIIDC), found that the state-owned corporation had extended &quot;undue favour&quot; to DLF by transferring the forest land and selling the land below its market value and suffered a loss of Rs. 438 crore, besides allowing benefit of extra floor area ratio (FAR).<br /><br />FAR is the ratio of the total floor area of buildings to the size of the land or the limit imposed on such a ratio.<br /><br /><em>'Wrong valuation'<br /></em><br />The reserve price of the land was fixed on the lower side due to &quot;wrong costing&quot;, according to the findings conveyed by the auditors to HSIIDC in December 2012. Aam Aadmi Party convener Arvind Kejriwal and the opposition Indian National Lok Dal (INLD) have accused the Hooda Government in the past of &quot;favouring&quot; the developer in this deal. The state government and DLF had both vehemently denied the allegations at that time.<br /><br />However, the auditors are learnt to have pointed out now that ILFS Infrastructure Development Corporation Limited, consultant for assessment of land cost and preparation of handholding documents, had valued the land cost by using a mixed approach - multiplying average market rate of land with average district collector (DC) rate. The CAG report, according to sources, noted that the market rate for residential plots was 2.79 times more of average DC rate and average market rate for commercial plots was 3.105 times more of average DC rate, but the consultant ignored the actual market rates and took the factor of 1.8 times of average DC rates for reasons not available on record for valuation of residential land and factor of 3.12 times for valuation of commercial plots.<br /><br />&quot;The value of property considering factors adopted by the valuers worked out to Rs. 1,683 crore, whereas the valuation of property by considering correct average factors for residential area and commercial plots works out to Rs. 2,142 crore. However, the corporation in April 2008 approved the reserved price of the land at Rs. 1,700 crore on the basis of valuations without looking at the calculations,&quot; sources said, quoting the auditors' findings.<br /><br /><em>Sole bidder left<br /></em><br />The corporation had floated the scheme in January 2009 for sale of the land and only one bid was received from DLF in April 2009. The bidder was found to be technically qualified and its bid of Rs. 12,000 per square metre was opened. However, it made certain suggestions to make the project &quot;financially viable&quot;. The project parameters were re-examined and modified, allowing additional FAR at the rate of 20% of area to the successful bidder as per the decision taken by the then principal secretary, town and country planning, in July 2009. The project was re-advertised on July 20, 2009, and two additional bids from Country Heights Holdings, Berhad (Malayisa) and consortium led by Unitech Limited were received.<br /><br />While the technical bids were opened on August 12, 2009, HSIIDC rejected the bids submitted by Country Heights Holdings and Unitech Limited on the ground of their being &quot;technically non-responsive&quot; due to not fulfilling the minimum criteria and decided not to open their financial bids. The financial bid of DLF, which was the sole bidder left in the process, of Rs. 1,703 crore was accepted and subsequently approved by the state government. In February 2010, the developer was issued the regular letter of allotment for the land.<br /><br />In addition, the CAG is learnt to have examined the release of land from the acquisition process by the state government in favour of private developers and its licensing policy by way of a special audit of the town and country planning department, finding instances of &quot;undue favour&quot; and insufficient planning in some cases.</div>               </font>
        </td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
        <td>&nbsp;</td>
    </tr>

    <tr>
        <td height="50" style="border-top:1px solid #000; border-bottom:1px solid #000;padding-top:10px;">
            <form><input type="button" value=" Print this page "
                         onclick="window.print();return false;"/></form>
        </td>
    </tr>
</table></body>
</html>'

}
$cookies = []
$values = [
	(int) 0 => 'text/html; charset=UTF-8'
]
$name = 'Content-Type'
$first = true
$value = 'text/html; charset=UTF-8'
header - [internal], line ??
Cake\Http\ResponseEmitter::emitHeaders() - CORE/src/Http/ResponseEmitter.php, line 181
Cake\Http\ResponseEmitter::emit() - CORE/src/Http/ResponseEmitter.php, line 55
Cake\Http\Server::emit() - CORE/src/Http/Server.php, line 141
[main] - ROOT/webroot/index.php, line 39

<head>

    <link rel="canonical" href="<?php echo Configure::read('SITE_URL'); ?><?php echo $urlPrefix;?><?php echo $article_current->category->slug; ?>/<?php echo $article_current->seo_url; ?>.html"/>

    <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"/>

$viewFile = '/home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp'
$dataForView = [
	'article_current' => object(App\Model\Entity\Article) {

		'id' => (int) 19644,
		'title' => 'CAG questions costing of 350-acre Gurgaon land sold to DLF -Navneet Sharma',
		'subheading' => '',
		'description' => '<div align="justify">
-The Hindustan Times<br />
<br />
In what seems set to provide fresh ammo to its political rivals, the comptroller and auditor general (CAG) is learnt to have raised questions about the valuation of 350 acres given by the Haryana government to realty major DLF Limited in Gurgaon through competitive bidding for setting up a recreation-cum-leisure project.<br />
<br />
The CAG, which examined the procedures and the competitive bidding route taken by the Haryana State Industrial and Infrastructure Development Corporation (HSIIDC), found that the state-owned corporation had extended &quot;undue favour&quot; to DLF by transferring the forest land and selling the land below its market value and suffered a loss of Rs. 438 crore, besides allowing benefit of extra floor area ratio (FAR).<br />
<br />
FAR is the ratio of the total floor area of buildings to the size of the land or the limit imposed on such a ratio.<br />
<br />
<em>'Wrong valuation'<br />
</em><br />
The reserve price of the land was fixed on the lower side due to &quot;wrong costing&quot;, according to the findings conveyed by the auditors to HSIIDC in December 2012. Aam Aadmi Party convener Arvind Kejriwal and the opposition Indian National Lok Dal (INLD) have accused the Hooda Government in the past of &quot;favouring&quot; the developer in this deal. The state government and DLF had both vehemently denied the allegations at that time.<br />
<br />
However, the auditors are learnt to have pointed out now that ILFS Infrastructure Development Corporation Limited, consultant for assessment of land cost and preparation of handholding documents, had valued the land cost by using a mixed approach - multiplying average market rate of land with average district collector (DC) rate. The CAG report, according to sources, noted that the market rate for residential plots was 2.79 times more of average DC rate and average market rate for commercial plots was 3.105 times more of average DC rate, but the consultant ignored the actual market rates and took the factor of 1.8 times of average DC rates for reasons not available on record for valuation of residential land and factor of 3.12 times for valuation of commercial plots.<br />
<br />
&quot;The value of property considering factors adopted by the valuers worked out to Rs. 1,683 crore, whereas the valuation of property by considering correct average factors for residential area and commercial plots works out to Rs. 2,142 crore. However, the corporation in April 2008 approved the reserved price of the land at Rs. 1,700 crore on the basis of valuations without looking at the calculations,&quot; sources said, quoting the auditors' findings.<br />
<br />
<em>Sole bidder left<br />
</em><br />
The corporation had floated the scheme in January 2009 for sale of the land and only one bid was received from DLF in April 2009. The bidder was found to be technically qualified and its bid of Rs. 12,000 per square metre was opened. However, it made certain suggestions to make the project &quot;financially viable&quot;. The project parameters were re-examined and modified, allowing additional FAR at the rate of 20% of area to the successful bidder as per the decision taken by the then principal secretary, town and country planning, in July 2009. The project was re-advertised on July 20, 2009, and two additional bids from Country Heights Holdings, Berhad (Malayisa) and consortium led by Unitech Limited were received.<br />
<br />
While the technical bids were opened on August 12, 2009, HSIIDC rejected the bids submitted by Country Heights Holdings and Unitech Limited on the ground of their being &quot;technically non-responsive&quot; due to not fulfilling the minimum criteria and decided not to open their financial bids. The financial bid of DLF, which was the sole bidder left in the process, of Rs. 1,703 crore was accepted and subsequently approved by the state government. In February 2010, the developer was issued the regular letter of allotment for the land.<br />
<br />
In addition, the CAG is learnt to have examined the release of land from the acquisition process by the state government in favour of private developers and its licensing policy by way of a special audit of the town and country planning department, finding instances of &quot;undue favour&quot; and insufficient planning in some cases.
</div>',
		'credit_writer' => 'The Hindustan Times, 7 March, 2013, http://www.hindustantimes.com/Punjab/Chandigarh/CAG-questions-costing-of-350-acre-Gurgaon-land-sold-to-DLF/SP-Article1-1022494.aspx',
		'article_img' => '',
		'article_img_thumb' => '',
		'status' => (int) 1,
		'show_on_home' => (int) 1,
		'lang' => 'EN',
		'category_id' => (int) 16,
		'tag_keyword' => '',
		'seo_url' => 'cag-questions-costing-of-350-acre-gurgaon-land-sold-to-dlf-navneet-sharma-19783',
		'meta_title' => null,
		'meta_keywords' => null,
		'meta_description' => null,
		'noindex' => (int) 0,
		'publish_date' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenDate) {},
		'most_visit_section_id' => null,
		'article_big_img' => null,
		'liveid' => (int) 19783,
		'created' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {},
		'modified' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {},
		'edate' => '',
		'tags' => [
			[maximum depth reached]
		],
		'category' => object(App\Model\Entity\Category) {},
		'[new]' => false,
		'[accessible]' => [
			[maximum depth reached]
		],
		'[dirty]' => [[maximum depth reached]],
		'[original]' => [[maximum depth reached]],
		'[virtual]' => [[maximum depth reached]],
		'[hasErrors]' => false,
		'[errors]' => [[maximum depth reached]],
		'[invalid]' => [[maximum depth reached]],
		'[repository]' => 'Articles'
	
	},
	'articleid' => (int) 19644,
	'metaTitle' => 'LATEST NEWS UPDATES | CAG questions costing of 350-acre Gurgaon land sold to DLF -Navneet Sharma',
	'metaKeywords' => 'Comptroller and Auditor-General,CAG,Corruption,Land',
	'metaDesc' => '
-The Hindustan Times

In what seems set to provide fresh ammo to its political rivals, the comptroller and auditor general (CAG) is learnt to have raised questions about the valuation of 350 acres given by the Haryana government to realty major...',
	'disp' => '<div align="justify">-The Hindustan Times<br /><br />In what seems set to provide fresh ammo to its political rivals, the comptroller and auditor general (CAG) is learnt to have raised questions about the valuation of 350 acres given by the Haryana government to realty major DLF Limited in Gurgaon through competitive bidding for setting up a recreation-cum-leisure project.<br /><br />The CAG, which examined the procedures and the competitive bidding route taken by the Haryana State Industrial and Infrastructure Development Corporation (HSIIDC), found that the state-owned corporation had extended &quot;undue favour&quot; to DLF by transferring the forest land and selling the land below its market value and suffered a loss of Rs. 438 crore, besides allowing benefit of extra floor area ratio (FAR).<br /><br />FAR is the ratio of the total floor area of buildings to the size of the land or the limit imposed on such a ratio.<br /><br /><em>'Wrong valuation'<br /></em><br />The reserve price of the land was fixed on the lower side due to &quot;wrong costing&quot;, according to the findings conveyed by the auditors to HSIIDC in December 2012. Aam Aadmi Party convener Arvind Kejriwal and the opposition Indian National Lok Dal (INLD) have accused the Hooda Government in the past of &quot;favouring&quot; the developer in this deal. The state government and DLF had both vehemently denied the allegations at that time.<br /><br />However, the auditors are learnt to have pointed out now that ILFS Infrastructure Development Corporation Limited, consultant for assessment of land cost and preparation of handholding documents, had valued the land cost by using a mixed approach - multiplying average market rate of land with average district collector (DC) rate. The CAG report, according to sources, noted that the market rate for residential plots was 2.79 times more of average DC rate and average market rate for commercial plots was 3.105 times more of average DC rate, but the consultant ignored the actual market rates and took the factor of 1.8 times of average DC rates for reasons not available on record for valuation of residential land and factor of 3.12 times for valuation of commercial plots.<br /><br />&quot;The value of property considering factors adopted by the valuers worked out to Rs. 1,683 crore, whereas the valuation of property by considering correct average factors for residential area and commercial plots works out to Rs. 2,142 crore. However, the corporation in April 2008 approved the reserved price of the land at Rs. 1,700 crore on the basis of valuations without looking at the calculations,&quot; sources said, quoting the auditors' findings.<br /><br /><em>Sole bidder left<br /></em><br />The corporation had floated the scheme in January 2009 for sale of the land and only one bid was received from DLF in April 2009. The bidder was found to be technically qualified and its bid of Rs. 12,000 per square metre was opened. However, it made certain suggestions to make the project &quot;financially viable&quot;. The project parameters were re-examined and modified, allowing additional FAR at the rate of 20% of area to the successful bidder as per the decision taken by the then principal secretary, town and country planning, in July 2009. The project was re-advertised on July 20, 2009, and two additional bids from Country Heights Holdings, Berhad (Malayisa) and consortium led by Unitech Limited were received.<br /><br />While the technical bids were opened on August 12, 2009, HSIIDC rejected the bids submitted by Country Heights Holdings and Unitech Limited on the ground of their being &quot;technically non-responsive&quot; due to not fulfilling the minimum criteria and decided not to open their financial bids. The financial bid of DLF, which was the sole bidder left in the process, of Rs. 1,703 crore was accepted and subsequently approved by the state government. In February 2010, the developer was issued the regular letter of allotment for the land.<br /><br />In addition, the CAG is learnt to have examined the release of land from the acquisition process by the state government in favour of private developers and its licensing policy by way of a special audit of the town and country planning department, finding instances of &quot;undue favour&quot; and insufficient planning in some cases.</div>',
	'lang' => 'English',
	'SITE_URL' => 'https://im4change.in/',
	'site_title' => 'im4change',
	'adminprix' => 'admin'
]
$article_current = object(App\Model\Entity\Article) {

	'id' => (int) 19644,
	'title' => 'CAG questions costing of 350-acre Gurgaon land sold to DLF -Navneet Sharma',
	'subheading' => '',
	'description' => '<div align="justify">
-The Hindustan Times<br />
<br />
In what seems set to provide fresh ammo to its political rivals, the comptroller and auditor general (CAG) is learnt to have raised questions about the valuation of 350 acres given by the Haryana government to realty major DLF Limited in Gurgaon through competitive bidding for setting up a recreation-cum-leisure project.<br />
<br />
The CAG, which examined the procedures and the competitive bidding route taken by the Haryana State Industrial and Infrastructure Development Corporation (HSIIDC), found that the state-owned corporation had extended &quot;undue favour&quot; to DLF by transferring the forest land and selling the land below its market value and suffered a loss of Rs. 438 crore, besides allowing benefit of extra floor area ratio (FAR).<br />
<br />
FAR is the ratio of the total floor area of buildings to the size of the land or the limit imposed on such a ratio.<br />
<br />
<em>'Wrong valuation'<br />
</em><br />
The reserve price of the land was fixed on the lower side due to &quot;wrong costing&quot;, according to the findings conveyed by the auditors to HSIIDC in December 2012. Aam Aadmi Party convener Arvind Kejriwal and the opposition Indian National Lok Dal (INLD) have accused the Hooda Government in the past of &quot;favouring&quot; the developer in this deal. The state government and DLF had both vehemently denied the allegations at that time.<br />
<br />
However, the auditors are learnt to have pointed out now that ILFS Infrastructure Development Corporation Limited, consultant for assessment of land cost and preparation of handholding documents, had valued the land cost by using a mixed approach - multiplying average market rate of land with average district collector (DC) rate. The CAG report, according to sources, noted that the market rate for residential plots was 2.79 times more of average DC rate and average market rate for commercial plots was 3.105 times more of average DC rate, but the consultant ignored the actual market rates and took the factor of 1.8 times of average DC rates for reasons not available on record for valuation of residential land and factor of 3.12 times for valuation of commercial plots.<br />
<br />
&quot;The value of property considering factors adopted by the valuers worked out to Rs. 1,683 crore, whereas the valuation of property by considering correct average factors for residential area and commercial plots works out to Rs. 2,142 crore. However, the corporation in April 2008 approved the reserved price of the land at Rs. 1,700 crore on the basis of valuations without looking at the calculations,&quot; sources said, quoting the auditors' findings.<br />
<br />
<em>Sole bidder left<br />
</em><br />
The corporation had floated the scheme in January 2009 for sale of the land and only one bid was received from DLF in April 2009. The bidder was found to be technically qualified and its bid of Rs. 12,000 per square metre was opened. However, it made certain suggestions to make the project &quot;financially viable&quot;. The project parameters were re-examined and modified, allowing additional FAR at the rate of 20% of area to the successful bidder as per the decision taken by the then principal secretary, town and country planning, in July 2009. The project was re-advertised on July 20, 2009, and two additional bids from Country Heights Holdings, Berhad (Malayisa) and consortium led by Unitech Limited were received.<br />
<br />
While the technical bids were opened on August 12, 2009, HSIIDC rejected the bids submitted by Country Heights Holdings and Unitech Limited on the ground of their being &quot;technically non-responsive&quot; due to not fulfilling the minimum criteria and decided not to open their financial bids. The financial bid of DLF, which was the sole bidder left in the process, of Rs. 1,703 crore was accepted and subsequently approved by the state government. In February 2010, the developer was issued the regular letter of allotment for the land.<br />
<br />
In addition, the CAG is learnt to have examined the release of land from the acquisition process by the state government in favour of private developers and its licensing policy by way of a special audit of the town and country planning department, finding instances of &quot;undue favour&quot; and insufficient planning in some cases.
</div>',
	'credit_writer' => 'The Hindustan Times, 7 March, 2013, http://www.hindustantimes.com/Punjab/Chandigarh/CAG-questions-costing-of-350-acre-Gurgaon-land-sold-to-DLF/SP-Article1-1022494.aspx',
	'article_img' => '',
	'article_img_thumb' => '',
	'status' => (int) 1,
	'show_on_home' => (int) 1,
	'lang' => 'EN',
	'category_id' => (int) 16,
	'tag_keyword' => '',
	'seo_url' => 'cag-questions-costing-of-350-acre-gurgaon-land-sold-to-dlf-navneet-sharma-19783',
	'meta_title' => null,
	'meta_keywords' => null,
	'meta_description' => null,
	'noindex' => (int) 0,
	'publish_date' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenDate) {},
	'most_visit_section_id' => null,
	'article_big_img' => null,
	'liveid' => (int) 19783,
	'created' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {},
	'modified' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {},
	'edate' => '',
	'tags' => [
		(int) 0 => object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {},
		(int) 1 => object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {},
		(int) 2 => object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {},
		(int) 3 => object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {}
	],
	'category' => object(App\Model\Entity\Category) {},
	'[new]' => false,
	'[accessible]' => [
		'*' => true,
		'id' => false
	],
	'[dirty]' => [],
	'[original]' => [],
	'[virtual]' => [],
	'[hasErrors]' => false,
	'[errors]' => [],
	'[invalid]' => [],
	'[repository]' => 'Articles'

}
$articleid = (int) 19644
$metaTitle = 'LATEST NEWS UPDATES | CAG questions costing of 350-acre Gurgaon land sold to DLF -Navneet Sharma'
$metaKeywords = 'Comptroller and Auditor-General,CAG,Corruption,Land'
$metaDesc = '
-The Hindustan Times

In what seems set to provide fresh ammo to its political rivals, the comptroller and auditor general (CAG) is learnt to have raised questions about the valuation of 350 acres given by the Haryana government to realty major...'
$disp = '<div align="justify">-The Hindustan Times<br /><br />In what seems set to provide fresh ammo to its political rivals, the comptroller and auditor general (CAG) is learnt to have raised questions about the valuation of 350 acres given by the Haryana government to realty major DLF Limited in Gurgaon through competitive bidding for setting up a recreation-cum-leisure project.<br /><br />The CAG, which examined the procedures and the competitive bidding route taken by the Haryana State Industrial and Infrastructure Development Corporation (HSIIDC), found that the state-owned corporation had extended &quot;undue favour&quot; to DLF by transferring the forest land and selling the land below its market value and suffered a loss of Rs. 438 crore, besides allowing benefit of extra floor area ratio (FAR).<br /><br />FAR is the ratio of the total floor area of buildings to the size of the land or the limit imposed on such a ratio.<br /><br /><em>'Wrong valuation'<br /></em><br />The reserve price of the land was fixed on the lower side due to &quot;wrong costing&quot;, according to the findings conveyed by the auditors to HSIIDC in December 2012. Aam Aadmi Party convener Arvind Kejriwal and the opposition Indian National Lok Dal (INLD) have accused the Hooda Government in the past of &quot;favouring&quot; the developer in this deal. The state government and DLF had both vehemently denied the allegations at that time.<br /><br />However, the auditors are learnt to have pointed out now that ILFS Infrastructure Development Corporation Limited, consultant for assessment of land cost and preparation of handholding documents, had valued the land cost by using a mixed approach - multiplying average market rate of land with average district collector (DC) rate. The CAG report, according to sources, noted that the market rate for residential plots was 2.79 times more of average DC rate and average market rate for commercial plots was 3.105 times more of average DC rate, but the consultant ignored the actual market rates and took the factor of 1.8 times of average DC rates for reasons not available on record for valuation of residential land and factor of 3.12 times for valuation of commercial plots.<br /><br />&quot;The value of property considering factors adopted by the valuers worked out to Rs. 1,683 crore, whereas the valuation of property by considering correct average factors for residential area and commercial plots works out to Rs. 2,142 crore. However, the corporation in April 2008 approved the reserved price of the land at Rs. 1,700 crore on the basis of valuations without looking at the calculations,&quot; sources said, quoting the auditors' findings.<br /><br /><em>Sole bidder left<br /></em><br />The corporation had floated the scheme in January 2009 for sale of the land and only one bid was received from DLF in April 2009. The bidder was found to be technically qualified and its bid of Rs. 12,000 per square metre was opened. However, it made certain suggestions to make the project &quot;financially viable&quot;. The project parameters were re-examined and modified, allowing additional FAR at the rate of 20% of area to the successful bidder as per the decision taken by the then principal secretary, town and country planning, in July 2009. The project was re-advertised on July 20, 2009, and two additional bids from Country Heights Holdings, Berhad (Malayisa) and consortium led by Unitech Limited were received.<br /><br />While the technical bids were opened on August 12, 2009, HSIIDC rejected the bids submitted by Country Heights Holdings and Unitech Limited on the ground of their being &quot;technically non-responsive&quot; due to not fulfilling the minimum criteria and decided not to open their financial bids. The financial bid of DLF, which was the sole bidder left in the process, of Rs. 1,703 crore was accepted and subsequently approved by the state government. In February 2010, the developer was issued the regular letter of allotment for the land.<br /><br />In addition, the CAG is learnt to have examined the release of land from the acquisition process by the state government in favour of private developers and its licensing policy by way of a special audit of the town and country planning department, finding instances of &quot;undue favour&quot; and insufficient planning in some cases.</div>'
$lang = 'English'
$SITE_URL = 'https://im4change.in/'
$site_title = 'im4change'
$adminprix = 'admin'

include - APP/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp, line 8
Cake\View\View::_evaluate() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 1413
Cake\View\View::_render() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 1374
Cake\View\View::renderLayout() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 927
Cake\View\View::render() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 885
Cake\Controller\Controller::render() - CORE/src/Controller/Controller.php, line 791
Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::_invoke() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 126
Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::dispatch() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 94
Cake\Http\BaseApplication::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/BaseApplication.php, line 235
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Routing\Middleware\RoutingMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/RoutingMiddleware.php, line 162
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Routing\Middleware\AssetMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/AssetMiddleware.php, line 88
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Error\Middleware\ErrorHandlerMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Error/Middleware/ErrorHandlerMiddleware.php, line 96
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Http\Runner::run() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 51

CAG questions costing of 350-acre Gurgaon land sold to DLF -Navneet Sharma

-The Hindustan Times In what seems set to provide fresh ammo to its political rivals, the comptroller and auditor general (CAG) is learnt to have raised questions about the valuation of 350 acres given by the Haryana government to realty major DLF Limited in Gurgaon through competitive bidding for setting up a recreation-cum-leisure project. The CAG, which examined the procedures and the competitive bidding route taken by the Haryana State Industrial and Infrastructure Development Corporation (HSIIDC), found that the state-owned corporation had extended "undue favour" to DLF by transferring the forest land and selling the land below its market value and suffered a loss of Rs. 438 crore, besides allowing benefit of extra floor area ratio (FAR). FAR is the ratio of the total floor area of buildings to the size of the land or the limit imposed on such a ratio. 'Wrong valuation' The reserve price of the land was fixed on the lower side due to "wrong costing", according to the findings conveyed by the auditors to HSIIDC in December 2012. Aam Aadmi Party convener Arvind Kejriwal and the opposition Indian National Lok Dal (INLD) have accused the Hooda Government in the past of "favouring" the developer in this deal. The state government and DLF had both vehemently denied the allegations at that time. However, the auditors are learnt to have pointed out now that ILFS Infrastructure Development Corporation Limited, consultant for assessment of land cost and preparation of handholding documents, had valued the land cost by using a mixed approach - multiplying average market rate of land with average district collector (DC) rate. The CAG report, according to sources, noted that the market rate for residential plots was 2.79 times more of average DC rate and average market rate for commercial plots was 3.105 times more of average DC rate, but the consultant ignored the actual market rates and took the factor of 1.8 times of average DC rates for reasons not available on record for valuation of residential land and factor of 3.12 times for valuation of commercial plots. "The value of property considering factors adopted by the valuers worked out to Rs. 1,683 crore, whereas the valuation of property by considering correct average factors for residential area and commercial plots works out to Rs. 2,142 crore. However, the corporation in April 2008 approved the reserved price of the land at Rs. 1,700 crore on the basis of valuations without looking at the calculations," sources said, quoting the auditors' findings. Sole bidder left The corporation had floated the scheme in January 2009 for sale of the land and only one bid was received from DLF in April 2009. The bidder was found to be technically qualified and its bid of Rs. 12,000 per square metre was opened. However, it made certain suggestions to make the project "financially viable". The project parameters were re-examined and modified, allowing additional FAR at the rate of 20% of area to the successful bidder as per the decision taken by the then principal secretary, town and country planning, in July 2009. The project was re-advertised on July 20, 2009, and two additional bids from Country Heights Holdings, Berhad (Malayisa) and consortium led by Unitech Limited were received. While the technical bids were opened on August 12, 2009, HSIIDC rejected the bids submitted by Country Heights Holdings and Unitech Limited on the ground of their being "technically non-responsive" due to not fulfilling the minimum criteria and decided not to open their financial bids. The financial bid of DLF, which was the sole bidder left in the process, of Rs. 1,703 crore was accepted and subsequently approved by the state government. In February 2010, the developer was issued the regular letter of allotment for the land. In addition, the CAG is learnt to have examined the release of land from the acquisition process by the state government in favour of private developers and its licensing policy by way of a special audit of the town and country planning department, finding instances of "undue favour" and insufficient planning in some cases.