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/tussle-over-road-exit-policy-sobhana-k-20190/print'
		[protected] base => ''
		[protected] webroot => '/'
		[protected] here => '/latest-news-updates/tussle-over-road-exit-policy-sobhana-k-20190/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/tussle-over-road-exit-policy-sobhana-k-20190/print'
		[protected] base => ''
		[protected] webroot => '/'
		[protected] here => '/latest-news-updates/tussle-over-road-exit-policy-sobhana-k-20190/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('cakeErr67f374b23f6c4-trace').style.display = (document.getElementById('cakeErr67f374b23f6c4-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="cakeErr67f374b23f6c4-trace" class="cake-stack-trace" style="display: none;"><a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="document.getElementById('cakeErr67f374b23f6c4-code').style.display = (document.getElementById('cakeErr67f374b23f6c4-code').style.display == 'none' ? '' : 'none')">Code</a> <a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="document.getElementById('cakeErr67f374b23f6c4-context').style.display = (document.getElementById('cakeErr67f374b23f6c4-context').style.display == 'none' ? '' : 'none')">Context</a><pre id="cakeErr67f374b23f6c4-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">$article_current</span><span style="color: #007700">-&gt;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">seo_url</span><span style="color: #007700">;&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">?&gt;</span>.html"/&gt;
</span></code></span>
<code><span style="color: #000000"><span style="color: #0000BB">&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #007700">&lt;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">meta&nbsp;http</span><span style="color: #007700">-</span><span style="color: #0000BB">equiv</span><span style="color: #007700">=</span><span style="color: #DD0000">"Content-Type"&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">content</span><span style="color: #007700">=</span><span style="color: #DD0000">"text/html;&nbsp;charset=utf-8"</span><span style="color: #007700">/&gt;
</span></span></code></pre><pre id="cakeErr67f374b23f6c4-context" class="cake-context" style="display: none;">$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) 20049,
		&#039;title&#039; =&gt; &#039;Tussle over road exit policy -Sobhana K&#039;,
		&#039;subheading&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
		&#039;description&#039; =&gt; &#039;&lt;div align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;
-The Telegraph
&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The National Highways Authority of India has accused the Planning Commission of &amp;quot;inconsistencies in stand&amp;quot;, saying they are creating confusion and delaying decisions on its projects.
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;
NHAI chairperson R.P. Singh has quoted instances - in a letter to commission member B.K. Chaturvedi - where the Planning Commission had taken a diametrically opposite stand from its earlier position that investors should be allowed to exit from finished projects rather than wait till the agreement period is over.
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;
Singh has also sent a copy of the letter to road secretary Vijay Chibber.
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;
The road sector has been hit by a financial crunch that many builders are facing and there are not many takers for projects. The NHAI has been able to award just around 1,500km of projects against the target of 7,700km for this financial year ending this Sunday. It has been able to construct close to 2,800km (which includes projects from previous years) of road in 2012-2013.
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;
Recently two big players, Andhra Pradesh-based infrastructure giants GMR and GVK backed out of NHAI projects. GMR exited a highway project connecting Rajasthan to Gujarat while GVK terminated one in Madhya Pradesh. Although both firms cited delay in getting environment clearances as reasons for dropping the projects, the NHAI maintains that it was because of lack of funds.
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;
&amp;quot;While GMR needed at least Rs 2,000 crore, GVK required Rs 1,500 crore,&amp;quot; a senior NHAI official said.
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;
The NHAI, therefore, wants that once the road is constructed, a builder should be allowed to pull out his investments or &amp;quot;exit&amp;quot; from a project. The NHAI felt that only then could builders invest in other projects. But for doing this, the existing rules need to be changed.
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;
At present, any builder or contractor who has been awarded a project before 2009 has to be associated with it till the end of the agreement period, which could be anything between 15 and 20 years. During this time, the builder is in charge of maintaining the road and the road tolls are supposed to make up for the investment costs.
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;
But the NHAI wants the builders to be allowed to sell their equity in the project instead of depending on road tolls so that these operators can invest in more projects.
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;
Singh said in meetings with the Planning Commission on January 30 and later on February 11, the panel agreed to the NHAI&#039;s proposal of allowing builders to exit from finished projects before the end of the contract period.
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;
In the recorded comments of the commission on an agenda note circulated by the Prime Minister&#039;s Office for a meeting on February 18, the plan panel is shown to be &amp;quot;in favour of relaxing&amp;quot; the rules if necessary. The note, however, says the Union cabinet should take the final decision.
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;
Singh, drawing attention to the panel&#039;s somersault, notes in his letter: &amp;quot;I am, therefore, surprised to see that when the draft cabinet note has been circulated by the ministry of road transport and highways, the planning commission through its comments has vehemently opposed the relaxation regarding the disinvestment of equity.&amp;quot;
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;
The letter dated March 26 - days before the quarterly review of the highways by the commission - also says: &amp;quot;Such inconsistencies in the stand of the Planning Commission are causing avoidable confusion. I would, therefore, request you to kindly discuss this matter during your proposed review on 3rd April.&amp;quot;
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;
The tussle between the plan panel and the NHAI is an ongoing battle. In December 2011, 18 engineers and senior officials of the ministry of roads resigned over the alleged misbehaviour by the adviser to the Planning Commission, Gajender Haldea, in meetings and his interference. The resignations were, however, not accepted. The engineers and Haldea continue to work in their respective posts.
&lt;/p&gt;&#039;,
		&#039;credit_writer&#039; =&gt; &#039;The Telegraph, 30 March, 2013, http://www.telegraphindia.com/1130330/jsp/nation/story_16727198.jsp#.UVbvVjfcing&#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;tussle-over-road-exit-policy-sobhana-k-20190&#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) 20190,
		&#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) 20049,
	&#039;metaTitle&#039; =&gt; &#039;LATEST NEWS UPDATES | Tussle over road exit policy -Sobhana K&#039;,
	&#039;metaKeywords&#039; =&gt; &#039;Planning Commission,roads,Infrastructure&#039;,
	&#039;metaDesc&#039; =&gt; &#039;
-The Telegraph



The National Highways Authority of India has accused the Planning Commission of &amp;quot;inconsistencies in stand&amp;quot;, saying they are creating confusion and delaying decisions on its projects.


NHAI chairperson R.P. Singh has quoted instances - in a letter to commission member...&#039;,
	&#039;disp&#039; =&gt; &#039;&lt;div align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;-The Telegraph&lt;/div&gt;&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;&lt;br /&gt;The National Highways Authority of India has accused the Planning Commission of &amp;quot;inconsistencies in stand&amp;quot;, saying they are creating confusion and delaying decisions on its projects.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;NHAI chairperson R.P. Singh has quoted instances - in a letter to commission member B.K. Chaturvedi - where the Planning Commission had taken a diametrically opposite stand from its earlier position that investors should be allowed to exit from finished projects rather than wait till the agreement period is over.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;Singh has also sent a copy of the letter to road secretary Vijay Chibber.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;The road sector has been hit by a financial crunch that many builders are facing and there are not many takers for projects. The NHAI has been able to award just around 1,500km of projects against the target of 7,700km for this financial year ending this Sunday. It has been able to construct close to 2,800km (which includes projects from previous years) of road in 2012-2013.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;Recently two big players, Andhra Pradesh-based infrastructure giants GMR and GVK backed out of NHAI projects. GMR exited a highway project connecting Rajasthan to Gujarat while GVK terminated one in Madhya Pradesh. Although both firms cited delay in getting environment clearances as reasons for dropping the projects, the NHAI maintains that it was because of lack of funds.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;&amp;quot;While GMR needed at least Rs 2,000 crore, GVK required Rs 1,500 crore,&amp;quot; a senior NHAI official said.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;The NHAI, therefore, wants that once the road is constructed, a builder should be allowed to pull out his investments or &amp;quot;exit&amp;quot; from a project. The NHAI felt that only then could builders invest in other projects. But for doing this, the existing rules need to be changed.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;At present, any builder or contractor who has been awarded a project before 2009 has to be associated with it till the end of the agreement period, which could be anything between 15 and 20 years. During this time, the builder is in charge of maintaining the road and the road tolls are supposed to make up for the investment costs.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;But the NHAI wants the builders to be allowed to sell their equity in the project instead of depending on road tolls so that these operators can invest in more projects.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;Singh said in meetings with the Planning Commission on January 30 and later on February 11, the panel agreed to the NHAI&#039;s proposal of allowing builders to exit from finished projects before the end of the contract period.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;In the recorded comments of the commission on an agenda note circulated by the Prime Minister&#039;s Office for a meeting on February 18, the plan panel is shown to be &amp;quot;in favour of relaxing&amp;quot; the rules if necessary. The note, however, says the Union cabinet should take the final decision.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;Singh, drawing attention to the panel&#039;s somersault, notes in his letter: &amp;quot;I am, therefore, surprised to see that when the draft cabinet note has been circulated by the ministry of road transport and highways, the planning commission through its comments has vehemently opposed the relaxation regarding the disinvestment of equity.&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;The letter dated March 26 - days before the quarterly review of the highways by the commission - also says: &amp;quot;Such inconsistencies in the stand of the Planning Commission are causing avoidable confusion. I would, therefore, request you to kindly discuss this matter during your proposed review on 3rd April.&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;The tussle between the plan panel and the NHAI is an ongoing battle. In December 2011, 18 engineers and senior officials of the ministry of roads resigned over the alleged misbehaviour by the adviser to the Planning Commission, Gajender Haldea, in meetings and his interference. The resignations were, however, not accepted. The engineers and Haldea continue to work in their respective posts.&lt;/p&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) 20049,
	&#039;title&#039; =&gt; &#039;Tussle over road exit policy -Sobhana K&#039;,
	&#039;subheading&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
	&#039;description&#039; =&gt; &#039;&lt;div align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;
-The Telegraph
&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The National Highways Authority of India has accused the Planning Commission of &amp;quot;inconsistencies in stand&amp;quot;, saying they are creating confusion and delaying decisions on its projects.
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;
NHAI chairperson R.P. Singh has quoted instances - in a letter to commission member B.K. Chaturvedi - where the Planning Commission had taken a diametrically opposite stand from its earlier position that investors should be allowed to exit from finished projects rather than wait till the agreement period is over.
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;
Singh has also sent a copy of the letter to road secretary Vijay Chibber.
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;
The road sector has been hit by a financial crunch that many builders are facing and there are not many takers for projects. The NHAI has been able to award just around 1,500km of projects against the target of 7,700km for this financial year ending this Sunday. It has been able to construct close to 2,800km (which includes projects from previous years) of road in 2012-2013.
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;
Recently two big players, Andhra Pradesh-based infrastructure giants GMR and GVK backed out of NHAI projects. GMR exited a highway project connecting Rajasthan to Gujarat while GVK terminated one in Madhya Pradesh. Although both firms cited delay in getting environment clearances as reasons for dropping the projects, the NHAI maintains that it was because of lack of funds.
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;
&amp;quot;While GMR needed at least Rs 2,000 crore, GVK required Rs 1,500 crore,&amp;quot; a senior NHAI official said.
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;
The NHAI, therefore, wants that once the road is constructed, a builder should be allowed to pull out his investments or &amp;quot;exit&amp;quot; from a project. The NHAI felt that only then could builders invest in other projects. But for doing this, the existing rules need to be changed.
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;
At present, any builder or contractor who has been awarded a project before 2009 has to be associated with it till the end of the agreement period, which could be anything between 15 and 20 years. During this time, the builder is in charge of maintaining the road and the road tolls are supposed to make up for the investment costs.
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;
But the NHAI wants the builders to be allowed to sell their equity in the project instead of depending on road tolls so that these operators can invest in more projects.
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;
Singh said in meetings with the Planning Commission on January 30 and later on February 11, the panel agreed to the NHAI&#039;s proposal of allowing builders to exit from finished projects before the end of the contract period.
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;
In the recorded comments of the commission on an agenda note circulated by the Prime Minister&#039;s Office for a meeting on February 18, the plan panel is shown to be &amp;quot;in favour of relaxing&amp;quot; the rules if necessary. The note, however, says the Union cabinet should take the final decision.
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;
Singh, drawing attention to the panel&#039;s somersault, notes in his letter: &amp;quot;I am, therefore, surprised to see that when the draft cabinet note has been circulated by the ministry of road transport and highways, the planning commission through its comments has vehemently opposed the relaxation regarding the disinvestment of equity.&amp;quot;
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;
The letter dated March 26 - days before the quarterly review of the highways by the commission - also says: &amp;quot;Such inconsistencies in the stand of the Planning Commission are causing avoidable confusion. I would, therefore, request you to kindly discuss this matter during your proposed review on 3rd April.&amp;quot;
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;
The tussle between the plan panel and the NHAI is an ongoing battle. In December 2011, 18 engineers and senior officials of the ministry of roads resigned over the alleged misbehaviour by the adviser to the Planning Commission, Gajender Haldea, in meetings and his interference. The resignations were, however, not accepted. The engineers and Haldea continue to work in their respective posts.
&lt;/p&gt;&#039;,
	&#039;credit_writer&#039; =&gt; &#039;The Telegraph, 30 March, 2013, http://www.telegraphindia.com/1130330/jsp/nation/story_16727198.jsp#.UVbvVjfcing&#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;tussle-over-road-exit-policy-sobhana-k-20190&#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) 20190,
	&#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) {}
	],
	&#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) 20049
$metaTitle = &#039;LATEST NEWS UPDATES | Tussle over road exit policy -Sobhana K&#039;
$metaKeywords = &#039;Planning Commission,roads,Infrastructure&#039;
$metaDesc = &#039;
-The Telegraph



The National Highways Authority of India has accused the Planning Commission of &amp;quot;inconsistencies in stand&amp;quot;, saying they are creating confusion and delaying decisions on its projects.


NHAI chairperson R.P. Singh has quoted instances - in a letter to commission member...&#039;
$disp = &#039;&lt;div align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;-The Telegraph&lt;/div&gt;&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;&lt;br /&gt;The National Highways Authority of India has accused the Planning Commission of &amp;quot;inconsistencies in stand&amp;quot;, saying they are creating confusion and delaying decisions on its projects.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;NHAI chairperson R.P. Singh has quoted instances - in a letter to commission member B.K. Chaturvedi - where the Planning Commission had taken a diametrically opposite stand from its earlier position that investors should be allowed to exit from finished projects rather than wait till the agreement period is over.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;Singh has also sent a copy of the letter to road secretary Vijay Chibber.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;The road sector has been hit by a financial crunch that many builders are facing and there are not many takers for projects. The NHAI has been able to award just around 1,500km of projects against the target of 7,700km for this financial year ending this Sunday. It has been able to construct close to 2,800km (which includes projects from previous years) of road in 2012-2013.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;Recently two big players, Andhra Pradesh-based infrastructure giants GMR and GVK backed out of NHAI projects. GMR exited a highway project connecting Rajasthan to Gujarat while GVK terminated one in Madhya Pradesh. Although both firms cited delay in getting environment clearances as reasons for dropping the projects, the NHAI maintains that it was because of lack of funds.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;&amp;quot;While GMR needed at least Rs 2,000 crore, GVK required Rs 1,500 crore,&amp;quot; a senior NHAI official said.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;The NHAI, therefore, wants that once the road is constructed, a builder should be allowed to pull out his investments or &amp;quot;exit&amp;quot; from a project. The NHAI felt that only then could builders invest in other projects. But for doing this, the existing rules need to be changed.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;At present, any builder or contractor who has been awarded a project before 2009 has to be associated with it till the end of the agreement period, which could be anything between 15 and 20 years. During this time, the builder is in charge of maintaining the road and the road tolls are supposed to make up for the investment costs.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;But the NHAI wants the builders to be allowed to sell their equity in the project instead of depending on road tolls so that these operators can invest in more projects.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;Singh said in meetings with the Planning Commission on January 30 and later on February 11, the panel agreed to the NHAI&#039;s proposal of allowing builders to exit from finished projects before the end of the contract period.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;In the recorded comments of the commission on an agenda note circulated by the Prime Minister&#039;s Office for a meeting on February 18, the plan panel is shown to be &amp;quot;in favour of relaxing&amp;quot; the rules if necessary. The note, however, says the Union cabinet should take the final decision.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;Singh, drawing attention to the panel&#039;s somersault, notes in his letter: &amp;quot;I am, therefore, surprised to see that when the draft cabinet note has been circulated by the ministry of road transport and highways, the planning commission through its comments has vehemently opposed the relaxation regarding the disinvestment of equity.&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;The letter dated March 26 - days before the quarterly review of the highways by the commission - also says: &amp;quot;Such inconsistencies in the stand of the Planning Commission are causing avoidable confusion. I would, therefore, request you to kindly discuss this matter during your proposed review on 3rd April.&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;The tussle between the plan panel and the NHAI is an ongoing battle. In December 2011, 18 engineers and senior officials of the ministry of roads resigned over the alleged misbehaviour by the adviser to the Planning Commission, Gajender Haldea, in meetings and his interference. The resignations were, however, not accepted. The engineers and Haldea continue to work in their respective posts.&lt;/p&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/tussle-over-road-exit-policy-sobhana-k-20190.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 | Tussle over road exit policy -Sobhana K | Im4change.org</title>
    <meta name="description" content="
-The Telegraph



The National Highways Authority of India has accused the Planning Commission of &quot;inconsistencies in stand&quot;, saying they are creating confusion and delaying decisions on its projects.


NHAI chairperson R.P. Singh has quoted instances - in a letter to commission member..."/>
    <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>Tussle over road exit policy -Sobhana K</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 Telegraph</div><p align="justify"><br />The National Highways Authority of India has accused the Planning Commission of &quot;inconsistencies in stand&quot;, saying they are creating confusion and delaying decisions on its projects.</p><p align="justify">NHAI chairperson R.P. Singh has quoted instances - in a letter to commission member B.K. Chaturvedi - where the Planning Commission had taken a diametrically opposite stand from its earlier position that investors should be allowed to exit from finished projects rather than wait till the agreement period is over.</p><p align="justify">Singh has also sent a copy of the letter to road secretary Vijay Chibber.</p><p align="justify">The road sector has been hit by a financial crunch that many builders are facing and there are not many takers for projects. The NHAI has been able to award just around 1,500km of projects against the target of 7,700km for this financial year ending this Sunday. It has been able to construct close to 2,800km (which includes projects from previous years) of road in 2012-2013.</p><p align="justify">Recently two big players, Andhra Pradesh-based infrastructure giants GMR and GVK backed out of NHAI projects. GMR exited a highway project connecting Rajasthan to Gujarat while GVK terminated one in Madhya Pradesh. Although both firms cited delay in getting environment clearances as reasons for dropping the projects, the NHAI maintains that it was because of lack of funds.</p><p align="justify">&quot;While GMR needed at least Rs 2,000 crore, GVK required Rs 1,500 crore,&quot; a senior NHAI official said.</p><p align="justify">The NHAI, therefore, wants that once the road is constructed, a builder should be allowed to pull out his investments or &quot;exit&quot; from a project. The NHAI felt that only then could builders invest in other projects. But for doing this, the existing rules need to be changed.</p><p align="justify">At present, any builder or contractor who has been awarded a project before 2009 has to be associated with it till the end of the agreement period, which could be anything between 15 and 20 years. During this time, the builder is in charge of maintaining the road and the road tolls are supposed to make up for the investment costs.</p><p align="justify">But the NHAI wants the builders to be allowed to sell their equity in the project instead of depending on road tolls so that these operators can invest in more projects.</p><p align="justify">Singh said in meetings with the Planning Commission on January 30 and later on February 11, the panel agreed to the NHAI's proposal of allowing builders to exit from finished projects before the end of the contract period.</p><p align="justify">In the recorded comments of the commission on an agenda note circulated by the Prime Minister's Office for a meeting on February 18, the plan panel is shown to be &quot;in favour of relaxing&quot; the rules if necessary. The note, however, says the Union cabinet should take the final decision.</p><p align="justify">Singh, drawing attention to the panel's somersault, notes in his letter: &quot;I am, therefore, surprised to see that when the draft cabinet note has been circulated by the ministry of road transport and highways, the planning commission through its comments has vehemently opposed the relaxation regarding the disinvestment of equity.&quot;</p><p align="justify">The letter dated March 26 - days before the quarterly review of the highways by the commission - also says: &quot;Such inconsistencies in the stand of the Planning Commission are causing avoidable confusion. I would, therefore, request you to kindly discuss this matter during your proposed review on 3rd April.&quot;</p><p align="justify">The tussle between the plan panel and the NHAI is an ongoing battle. In December 2011, 18 engineers and senior officials of the ministry of roads resigned over the alleged misbehaviour by the adviser to the Planning Commission, Gajender Haldea, in meetings and his interference. The resignations were, however, not accepted. The engineers and Haldea continue to work in their respective posts.</p>               </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('cakeErr67f374b23f6c4-trace').style.display = (document.getElementById('cakeErr67f374b23f6c4-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="cakeErr67f374b23f6c4-trace" class="cake-stack-trace" style="display: none;"><a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="document.getElementById('cakeErr67f374b23f6c4-code').style.display = (document.getElementById('cakeErr67f374b23f6c4-code').style.display == 'none' ? '' : 'none')">Code</a> <a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="document.getElementById('cakeErr67f374b23f6c4-context').style.display = (document.getElementById('cakeErr67f374b23f6c4-context').style.display == 'none' ? '' : 'none')">Context</a><pre id="cakeErr67f374b23f6c4-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">$article_current</span><span style="color: #007700">-&gt;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">seo_url</span><span style="color: #007700">;&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">?&gt;</span>.html"/&gt;
</span></code></span>
<code><span style="color: #000000"><span style="color: #0000BB">&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #007700">&lt;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">meta&nbsp;http</span><span style="color: #007700">-</span><span style="color: #0000BB">equiv</span><span style="color: #007700">=</span><span style="color: #DD0000">"Content-Type"&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">content</span><span style="color: #007700">=</span><span style="color: #DD0000">"text/html;&nbsp;charset=utf-8"</span><span style="color: #007700">/&gt;
</span></span></code></pre><pre id="cakeErr67f374b23f6c4-context" class="cake-context" style="display: none;">$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) 20049,
		&#039;title&#039; =&gt; &#039;Tussle over road exit policy -Sobhana K&#039;,
		&#039;subheading&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
		&#039;description&#039; =&gt; &#039;&lt;div align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;
-The Telegraph
&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The National Highways Authority of India has accused the Planning Commission of &amp;quot;inconsistencies in stand&amp;quot;, saying they are creating confusion and delaying decisions on its projects.
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;
NHAI chairperson R.P. Singh has quoted instances - in a letter to commission member B.K. Chaturvedi - where the Planning Commission had taken a diametrically opposite stand from its earlier position that investors should be allowed to exit from finished projects rather than wait till the agreement period is over.
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;
Singh has also sent a copy of the letter to road secretary Vijay Chibber.
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;
The road sector has been hit by a financial crunch that many builders are facing and there are not many takers for projects. The NHAI has been able to award just around 1,500km of projects against the target of 7,700km for this financial year ending this Sunday. It has been able to construct close to 2,800km (which includes projects from previous years) of road in 2012-2013.
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;
Recently two big players, Andhra Pradesh-based infrastructure giants GMR and GVK backed out of NHAI projects. GMR exited a highway project connecting Rajasthan to Gujarat while GVK terminated one in Madhya Pradesh. Although both firms cited delay in getting environment clearances as reasons for dropping the projects, the NHAI maintains that it was because of lack of funds.
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;
&amp;quot;While GMR needed at least Rs 2,000 crore, GVK required Rs 1,500 crore,&amp;quot; a senior NHAI official said.
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;
The NHAI, therefore, wants that once the road is constructed, a builder should be allowed to pull out his investments or &amp;quot;exit&amp;quot; from a project. The NHAI felt that only then could builders invest in other projects. But for doing this, the existing rules need to be changed.
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;
At present, any builder or contractor who has been awarded a project before 2009 has to be associated with it till the end of the agreement period, which could be anything between 15 and 20 years. During this time, the builder is in charge of maintaining the road and the road tolls are supposed to make up for the investment costs.
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;
But the NHAI wants the builders to be allowed to sell their equity in the project instead of depending on road tolls so that these operators can invest in more projects.
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;
Singh said in meetings with the Planning Commission on January 30 and later on February 11, the panel agreed to the NHAI&#039;s proposal of allowing builders to exit from finished projects before the end of the contract period.
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;
In the recorded comments of the commission on an agenda note circulated by the Prime Minister&#039;s Office for a meeting on February 18, the plan panel is shown to be &amp;quot;in favour of relaxing&amp;quot; the rules if necessary. The note, however, says the Union cabinet should take the final decision.
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;
Singh, drawing attention to the panel&#039;s somersault, notes in his letter: &amp;quot;I am, therefore, surprised to see that when the draft cabinet note has been circulated by the ministry of road transport and highways, the planning commission through its comments has vehemently opposed the relaxation regarding the disinvestment of equity.&amp;quot;
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;
The letter dated March 26 - days before the quarterly review of the highways by the commission - also says: &amp;quot;Such inconsistencies in the stand of the Planning Commission are causing avoidable confusion. I would, therefore, request you to kindly discuss this matter during your proposed review on 3rd April.&amp;quot;
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;
The tussle between the plan panel and the NHAI is an ongoing battle. In December 2011, 18 engineers and senior officials of the ministry of roads resigned over the alleged misbehaviour by the adviser to the Planning Commission, Gajender Haldea, in meetings and his interference. The resignations were, however, not accepted. The engineers and Haldea continue to work in their respective posts.
&lt;/p&gt;&#039;,
		&#039;credit_writer&#039; =&gt; &#039;The Telegraph, 30 March, 2013, http://www.telegraphindia.com/1130330/jsp/nation/story_16727198.jsp#.UVbvVjfcing&#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;tussle-over-road-exit-policy-sobhana-k-20190&#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) 20190,
		&#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) 20049,
	&#039;metaTitle&#039; =&gt; &#039;LATEST NEWS UPDATES | Tussle over road exit policy -Sobhana K&#039;,
	&#039;metaKeywords&#039; =&gt; &#039;Planning Commission,roads,Infrastructure&#039;,
	&#039;metaDesc&#039; =&gt; &#039;
-The Telegraph



The National Highways Authority of India has accused the Planning Commission of &amp;quot;inconsistencies in stand&amp;quot;, saying they are creating confusion and delaying decisions on its projects.


NHAI chairperson R.P. Singh has quoted instances - in a letter to commission member...&#039;,
	&#039;disp&#039; =&gt; &#039;&lt;div align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;-The Telegraph&lt;/div&gt;&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;&lt;br /&gt;The National Highways Authority of India has accused the Planning Commission of &amp;quot;inconsistencies in stand&amp;quot;, saying they are creating confusion and delaying decisions on its projects.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;NHAI chairperson R.P. Singh has quoted instances - in a letter to commission member B.K. Chaturvedi - where the Planning Commission had taken a diametrically opposite stand from its earlier position that investors should be allowed to exit from finished projects rather than wait till the agreement period is over.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;Singh has also sent a copy of the letter to road secretary Vijay Chibber.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;The road sector has been hit by a financial crunch that many builders are facing and there are not many takers for projects. The NHAI has been able to award just around 1,500km of projects against the target of 7,700km for this financial year ending this Sunday. It has been able to construct close to 2,800km (which includes projects from previous years) of road in 2012-2013.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;Recently two big players, Andhra Pradesh-based infrastructure giants GMR and GVK backed out of NHAI projects. GMR exited a highway project connecting Rajasthan to Gujarat while GVK terminated one in Madhya Pradesh. Although both firms cited delay in getting environment clearances as reasons for dropping the projects, the NHAI maintains that it was because of lack of funds.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;&amp;quot;While GMR needed at least Rs 2,000 crore, GVK required Rs 1,500 crore,&amp;quot; a senior NHAI official said.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;The NHAI, therefore, wants that once the road is constructed, a builder should be allowed to pull out his investments or &amp;quot;exit&amp;quot; from a project. The NHAI felt that only then could builders invest in other projects. But for doing this, the existing rules need to be changed.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;At present, any builder or contractor who has been awarded a project before 2009 has to be associated with it till the end of the agreement period, which could be anything between 15 and 20 years. During this time, the builder is in charge of maintaining the road and the road tolls are supposed to make up for the investment costs.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;But the NHAI wants the builders to be allowed to sell their equity in the project instead of depending on road tolls so that these operators can invest in more projects.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;Singh said in meetings with the Planning Commission on January 30 and later on February 11, the panel agreed to the NHAI&#039;s proposal of allowing builders to exit from finished projects before the end of the contract period.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;In the recorded comments of the commission on an agenda note circulated by the Prime Minister&#039;s Office for a meeting on February 18, the plan panel is shown to be &amp;quot;in favour of relaxing&amp;quot; the rules if necessary. The note, however, says the Union cabinet should take the final decision.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;Singh, drawing attention to the panel&#039;s somersault, notes in his letter: &amp;quot;I am, therefore, surprised to see that when the draft cabinet note has been circulated by the ministry of road transport and highways, the planning commission through its comments has vehemently opposed the relaxation regarding the disinvestment of equity.&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;The letter dated March 26 - days before the quarterly review of the highways by the commission - also says: &amp;quot;Such inconsistencies in the stand of the Planning Commission are causing avoidable confusion. I would, therefore, request you to kindly discuss this matter during your proposed review on 3rd April.&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;The tussle between the plan panel and the NHAI is an ongoing battle. In December 2011, 18 engineers and senior officials of the ministry of roads resigned over the alleged misbehaviour by the adviser to the Planning Commission, Gajender Haldea, in meetings and his interference. The resignations were, however, not accepted. The engineers and Haldea continue to work in their respective posts.&lt;/p&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) 20049,
	&#039;title&#039; =&gt; &#039;Tussle over road exit policy -Sobhana K&#039;,
	&#039;subheading&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
	&#039;description&#039; =&gt; &#039;&lt;div align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;
-The Telegraph
&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The National Highways Authority of India has accused the Planning Commission of &amp;quot;inconsistencies in stand&amp;quot;, saying they are creating confusion and delaying decisions on its projects.
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;
NHAI chairperson R.P. Singh has quoted instances - in a letter to commission member B.K. Chaturvedi - where the Planning Commission had taken a diametrically opposite stand from its earlier position that investors should be allowed to exit from finished projects rather than wait till the agreement period is over.
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;
Singh has also sent a copy of the letter to road secretary Vijay Chibber.
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;
The road sector has been hit by a financial crunch that many builders are facing and there are not many takers for projects. The NHAI has been able to award just around 1,500km of projects against the target of 7,700km for this financial year ending this Sunday. It has been able to construct close to 2,800km (which includes projects from previous years) of road in 2012-2013.
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;
Recently two big players, Andhra Pradesh-based infrastructure giants GMR and GVK backed out of NHAI projects. GMR exited a highway project connecting Rajasthan to Gujarat while GVK terminated one in Madhya Pradesh. Although both firms cited delay in getting environment clearances as reasons for dropping the projects, the NHAI maintains that it was because of lack of funds.
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;
&amp;quot;While GMR needed at least Rs 2,000 crore, GVK required Rs 1,500 crore,&amp;quot; a senior NHAI official said.
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;
The NHAI, therefore, wants that once the road is constructed, a builder should be allowed to pull out his investments or &amp;quot;exit&amp;quot; from a project. The NHAI felt that only then could builders invest in other projects. But for doing this, the existing rules need to be changed.
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;
At present, any builder or contractor who has been awarded a project before 2009 has to be associated with it till the end of the agreement period, which could be anything between 15 and 20 years. During this time, the builder is in charge of maintaining the road and the road tolls are supposed to make up for the investment costs.
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;
But the NHAI wants the builders to be allowed to sell their equity in the project instead of depending on road tolls so that these operators can invest in more projects.
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;
Singh said in meetings with the Planning Commission on January 30 and later on February 11, the panel agreed to the NHAI&#039;s proposal of allowing builders to exit from finished projects before the end of the contract period.
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;
In the recorded comments of the commission on an agenda note circulated by the Prime Minister&#039;s Office for a meeting on February 18, the plan panel is shown to be &amp;quot;in favour of relaxing&amp;quot; the rules if necessary. The note, however, says the Union cabinet should take the final decision.
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;
Singh, drawing attention to the panel&#039;s somersault, notes in his letter: &amp;quot;I am, therefore, surprised to see that when the draft cabinet note has been circulated by the ministry of road transport and highways, the planning commission through its comments has vehemently opposed the relaxation regarding the disinvestment of equity.&amp;quot;
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;
The letter dated March 26 - days before the quarterly review of the highways by the commission - also says: &amp;quot;Such inconsistencies in the stand of the Planning Commission are causing avoidable confusion. I would, therefore, request you to kindly discuss this matter during your proposed review on 3rd April.&amp;quot;
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;
The tussle between the plan panel and the NHAI is an ongoing battle. In December 2011, 18 engineers and senior officials of the ministry of roads resigned over the alleged misbehaviour by the adviser to the Planning Commission, Gajender Haldea, in meetings and his interference. The resignations were, however, not accepted. The engineers and Haldea continue to work in their respective posts.
&lt;/p&gt;&#039;,
	&#039;credit_writer&#039; =&gt; &#039;The Telegraph, 30 March, 2013, http://www.telegraphindia.com/1130330/jsp/nation/story_16727198.jsp#.UVbvVjfcing&#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;tussle-over-road-exit-policy-sobhana-k-20190&#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) 20190,
	&#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) {}
	],
	&#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) 20049
$metaTitle = &#039;LATEST NEWS UPDATES | Tussle over road exit policy -Sobhana K&#039;
$metaKeywords = &#039;Planning Commission,roads,Infrastructure&#039;
$metaDesc = &#039;
-The Telegraph



The National Highways Authority of India has accused the Planning Commission of &amp;quot;inconsistencies in stand&amp;quot;, saying they are creating confusion and delaying decisions on its projects.


NHAI chairperson R.P. Singh has quoted instances - in a letter to commission member...&#039;
$disp = &#039;&lt;div align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;-The Telegraph&lt;/div&gt;&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;&lt;br /&gt;The National Highways Authority of India has accused the Planning Commission of &amp;quot;inconsistencies in stand&amp;quot;, saying they are creating confusion and delaying decisions on its projects.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;NHAI chairperson R.P. Singh has quoted instances - in a letter to commission member B.K. Chaturvedi - where the Planning Commission had taken a diametrically opposite stand from its earlier position that investors should be allowed to exit from finished projects rather than wait till the agreement period is over.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;Singh has also sent a copy of the letter to road secretary Vijay Chibber.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;The road sector has been hit by a financial crunch that many builders are facing and there are not many takers for projects. The NHAI has been able to award just around 1,500km of projects against the target of 7,700km for this financial year ending this Sunday. It has been able to construct close to 2,800km (which includes projects from previous years) of road in 2012-2013.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;Recently two big players, Andhra Pradesh-based infrastructure giants GMR and GVK backed out of NHAI projects. GMR exited a highway project connecting Rajasthan to Gujarat while GVK terminated one in Madhya Pradesh. Although both firms cited delay in getting environment clearances as reasons for dropping the projects, the NHAI maintains that it was because of lack of funds.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;&amp;quot;While GMR needed at least Rs 2,000 crore, GVK required Rs 1,500 crore,&amp;quot; a senior NHAI official said.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;The NHAI, therefore, wants that once the road is constructed, a builder should be allowed to pull out his investments or &amp;quot;exit&amp;quot; from a project. The NHAI felt that only then could builders invest in other projects. But for doing this, the existing rules need to be changed.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;At present, any builder or contractor who has been awarded a project before 2009 has to be associated with it till the end of the agreement period, which could be anything between 15 and 20 years. During this time, the builder is in charge of maintaining the road and the road tolls are supposed to make up for the investment costs.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;But the NHAI wants the builders to be allowed to sell their equity in the project instead of depending on road tolls so that these operators can invest in more projects.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;Singh said in meetings with the Planning Commission on January 30 and later on February 11, the panel agreed to the NHAI&#039;s proposal of allowing builders to exit from finished projects before the end of the contract period.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;In the recorded comments of the commission on an agenda note circulated by the Prime Minister&#039;s Office for a meeting on February 18, the plan panel is shown to be &amp;quot;in favour of relaxing&amp;quot; the rules if necessary. The note, however, says the Union cabinet should take the final decision.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;Singh, drawing attention to the panel&#039;s somersault, notes in his letter: &amp;quot;I am, therefore, surprised to see that when the draft cabinet note has been circulated by the ministry of road transport and highways, the planning commission through its comments has vehemently opposed the relaxation regarding the disinvestment of equity.&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;The letter dated March 26 - days before the quarterly review of the highways by the commission - also says: &amp;quot;Such inconsistencies in the stand of the Planning Commission are causing avoidable confusion. I would, therefore, request you to kindly discuss this matter during your proposed review on 3rd April.&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;The tussle between the plan panel and the NHAI is an ongoing battle. In December 2011, 18 engineers and senior officials of the ministry of roads resigned over the alleged misbehaviour by the adviser to the Planning Commission, Gajender Haldea, in meetings and his interference. The resignations were, however, not accepted. The engineers and Haldea continue to work in their respective posts.&lt;/p&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/tussle-over-road-exit-policy-sobhana-k-20190.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 | Tussle over road exit policy -Sobhana K | Im4change.org</title>
    <meta name="description" content="
-The Telegraph



The National Highways Authority of India has accused the Planning Commission of &quot;inconsistencies in stand&quot;, saying they are creating confusion and delaying decisions on its projects.


NHAI chairperson R.P. Singh has quoted instances - in a letter to commission member..."/>
    <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>Tussle over road exit policy -Sobhana K</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 Telegraph</div><p align="justify"><br />The National Highways Authority of India has accused the Planning Commission of &quot;inconsistencies in stand&quot;, saying they are creating confusion and delaying decisions on its projects.</p><p align="justify">NHAI chairperson R.P. Singh has quoted instances - in a letter to commission member B.K. Chaturvedi - where the Planning Commission had taken a diametrically opposite stand from its earlier position that investors should be allowed to exit from finished projects rather than wait till the agreement period is over.</p><p align="justify">Singh has also sent a copy of the letter to road secretary Vijay Chibber.</p><p align="justify">The road sector has been hit by a financial crunch that many builders are facing and there are not many takers for projects. The NHAI has been able to award just around 1,500km of projects against the target of 7,700km for this financial year ending this Sunday. It has been able to construct close to 2,800km (which includes projects from previous years) of road in 2012-2013.</p><p align="justify">Recently two big players, Andhra Pradesh-based infrastructure giants GMR and GVK backed out of NHAI projects. GMR exited a highway project connecting Rajasthan to Gujarat while GVK terminated one in Madhya Pradesh. Although both firms cited delay in getting environment clearances as reasons for dropping the projects, the NHAI maintains that it was because of lack of funds.</p><p align="justify">&quot;While GMR needed at least Rs 2,000 crore, GVK required Rs 1,500 crore,&quot; a senior NHAI official said.</p><p align="justify">The NHAI, therefore, wants that once the road is constructed, a builder should be allowed to pull out his investments or &quot;exit&quot; from a project. The NHAI felt that only then could builders invest in other projects. But for doing this, the existing rules need to be changed.</p><p align="justify">At present, any builder or contractor who has been awarded a project before 2009 has to be associated with it till the end of the agreement period, which could be anything between 15 and 20 years. During this time, the builder is in charge of maintaining the road and the road tolls are supposed to make up for the investment costs.</p><p align="justify">But the NHAI wants the builders to be allowed to sell their equity in the project instead of depending on road tolls so that these operators can invest in more projects.</p><p align="justify">Singh said in meetings with the Planning Commission on January 30 and later on February 11, the panel agreed to the NHAI's proposal of allowing builders to exit from finished projects before the end of the contract period.</p><p align="justify">In the recorded comments of the commission on an agenda note circulated by the Prime Minister's Office for a meeting on February 18, the plan panel is shown to be &quot;in favour of relaxing&quot; the rules if necessary. The note, however, says the Union cabinet should take the final decision.</p><p align="justify">Singh, drawing attention to the panel's somersault, notes in his letter: &quot;I am, therefore, surprised to see that when the draft cabinet note has been circulated by the ministry of road transport and highways, the planning commission through its comments has vehemently opposed the relaxation regarding the disinvestment of equity.&quot;</p><p align="justify">The letter dated March 26 - days before the quarterly review of the highways by the commission - also says: &quot;Such inconsistencies in the stand of the Planning Commission are causing avoidable confusion. I would, therefore, request you to kindly discuss this matter during your proposed review on 3rd April.&quot;</p><p align="justify">The tussle between the plan panel and the NHAI is an ongoing battle. In December 2011, 18 engineers and senior officials of the ministry of roads resigned over the alleged misbehaviour by the adviser to the Planning Commission, Gajender Haldea, in meetings and his interference. The resignations were, however, not accepted. The engineers and Haldea continue to work in their respective posts.</p>               </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('cakeErr67f374b23f6c4-trace').style.display = (document.getElementById('cakeErr67f374b23f6c4-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="cakeErr67f374b23f6c4-trace" class="cake-stack-trace" style="display: none;"><a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="document.getElementById('cakeErr67f374b23f6c4-code').style.display = (document.getElementById('cakeErr67f374b23f6c4-code').style.display == 'none' ? '' : 'none')">Code</a> <a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="document.getElementById('cakeErr67f374b23f6c4-context').style.display = (document.getElementById('cakeErr67f374b23f6c4-context').style.display == 'none' ? '' : 'none')">Context</a><pre id="cakeErr67f374b23f6c4-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">$article_current</span><span style="color: #007700">-&gt;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">seo_url</span><span style="color: #007700">;&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">?&gt;</span>.html"/&gt;
</span></code></span>
<code><span style="color: #000000"><span style="color: #0000BB">&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #007700">&lt;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">meta&nbsp;http</span><span style="color: #007700">-</span><span style="color: #0000BB">equiv</span><span style="color: #007700">=</span><span style="color: #DD0000">"Content-Type"&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">content</span><span style="color: #007700">=</span><span style="color: #DD0000">"text/html;&nbsp;charset=utf-8"</span><span style="color: #007700">/&gt;
</span></span></code></pre><pre id="cakeErr67f374b23f6c4-context" class="cake-context" style="display: none;">$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) 20049,
		&#039;title&#039; =&gt; &#039;Tussle over road exit policy -Sobhana K&#039;,
		&#039;subheading&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
		&#039;description&#039; =&gt; &#039;&lt;div align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;
-The Telegraph
&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The National Highways Authority of India has accused the Planning Commission of &amp;quot;inconsistencies in stand&amp;quot;, saying they are creating confusion and delaying decisions on its projects.
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;
NHAI chairperson R.P. Singh has quoted instances - in a letter to commission member B.K. Chaturvedi - where the Planning Commission had taken a diametrically opposite stand from its earlier position that investors should be allowed to exit from finished projects rather than wait till the agreement period is over.
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;
Singh has also sent a copy of the letter to road secretary Vijay Chibber.
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;
The road sector has been hit by a financial crunch that many builders are facing and there are not many takers for projects. The NHAI has been able to award just around 1,500km of projects against the target of 7,700km for this financial year ending this Sunday. It has been able to construct close to 2,800km (which includes projects from previous years) of road in 2012-2013.
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;
Recently two big players, Andhra Pradesh-based infrastructure giants GMR and GVK backed out of NHAI projects. GMR exited a highway project connecting Rajasthan to Gujarat while GVK terminated one in Madhya Pradesh. Although both firms cited delay in getting environment clearances as reasons for dropping the projects, the NHAI maintains that it was because of lack of funds.
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;
&amp;quot;While GMR needed at least Rs 2,000 crore, GVK required Rs 1,500 crore,&amp;quot; a senior NHAI official said.
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;
The NHAI, therefore, wants that once the road is constructed, a builder should be allowed to pull out his investments or &amp;quot;exit&amp;quot; from a project. The NHAI felt that only then could builders invest in other projects. But for doing this, the existing rules need to be changed.
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;
At present, any builder or contractor who has been awarded a project before 2009 has to be associated with it till the end of the agreement period, which could be anything between 15 and 20 years. During this time, the builder is in charge of maintaining the road and the road tolls are supposed to make up for the investment costs.
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;
But the NHAI wants the builders to be allowed to sell their equity in the project instead of depending on road tolls so that these operators can invest in more projects.
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;
Singh said in meetings with the Planning Commission on January 30 and later on February 11, the panel agreed to the NHAI&#039;s proposal of allowing builders to exit from finished projects before the end of the contract period.
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;
In the recorded comments of the commission on an agenda note circulated by the Prime Minister&#039;s Office for a meeting on February 18, the plan panel is shown to be &amp;quot;in favour of relaxing&amp;quot; the rules if necessary. The note, however, says the Union cabinet should take the final decision.
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;
Singh, drawing attention to the panel&#039;s somersault, notes in his letter: &amp;quot;I am, therefore, surprised to see that when the draft cabinet note has been circulated by the ministry of road transport and highways, the planning commission through its comments has vehemently opposed the relaxation regarding the disinvestment of equity.&amp;quot;
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;
The letter dated March 26 - days before the quarterly review of the highways by the commission - also says: &amp;quot;Such inconsistencies in the stand of the Planning Commission are causing avoidable confusion. I would, therefore, request you to kindly discuss this matter during your proposed review on 3rd April.&amp;quot;
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;
The tussle between the plan panel and the NHAI is an ongoing battle. In December 2011, 18 engineers and senior officials of the ministry of roads resigned over the alleged misbehaviour by the adviser to the Planning Commission, Gajender Haldea, in meetings and his interference. The resignations were, however, not accepted. The engineers and Haldea continue to work in their respective posts.
&lt;/p&gt;&#039;,
		&#039;credit_writer&#039; =&gt; &#039;The Telegraph, 30 March, 2013, http://www.telegraphindia.com/1130330/jsp/nation/story_16727198.jsp#.UVbvVjfcing&#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;tussle-over-road-exit-policy-sobhana-k-20190&#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) 20190,
		&#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) 20049,
	&#039;metaTitle&#039; =&gt; &#039;LATEST NEWS UPDATES | Tussle over road exit policy -Sobhana K&#039;,
	&#039;metaKeywords&#039; =&gt; &#039;Planning Commission,roads,Infrastructure&#039;,
	&#039;metaDesc&#039; =&gt; &#039;
-The Telegraph



The National Highways Authority of India has accused the Planning Commission of &amp;quot;inconsistencies in stand&amp;quot;, saying they are creating confusion and delaying decisions on its projects.


NHAI chairperson R.P. Singh has quoted instances - in a letter to commission member...&#039;,
	&#039;disp&#039; =&gt; &#039;&lt;div align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;-The Telegraph&lt;/div&gt;&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;&lt;br /&gt;The National Highways Authority of India has accused the Planning Commission of &amp;quot;inconsistencies in stand&amp;quot;, saying they are creating confusion and delaying decisions on its projects.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;NHAI chairperson R.P. Singh has quoted instances - in a letter to commission member B.K. Chaturvedi - where the Planning Commission had taken a diametrically opposite stand from its earlier position that investors should be allowed to exit from finished projects rather than wait till the agreement period is over.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;Singh has also sent a copy of the letter to road secretary Vijay Chibber.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;The road sector has been hit by a financial crunch that many builders are facing and there are not many takers for projects. The NHAI has been able to award just around 1,500km of projects against the target of 7,700km for this financial year ending this Sunday. It has been able to construct close to 2,800km (which includes projects from previous years) of road in 2012-2013.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;Recently two big players, Andhra Pradesh-based infrastructure giants GMR and GVK backed out of NHAI projects. GMR exited a highway project connecting Rajasthan to Gujarat while GVK terminated one in Madhya Pradesh. Although both firms cited delay in getting environment clearances as reasons for dropping the projects, the NHAI maintains that it was because of lack of funds.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;&amp;quot;While GMR needed at least Rs 2,000 crore, GVK required Rs 1,500 crore,&amp;quot; a senior NHAI official said.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;The NHAI, therefore, wants that once the road is constructed, a builder should be allowed to pull out his investments or &amp;quot;exit&amp;quot; from a project. The NHAI felt that only then could builders invest in other projects. But for doing this, the existing rules need to be changed.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;At present, any builder or contractor who has been awarded a project before 2009 has to be associated with it till the end of the agreement period, which could be anything between 15 and 20 years. During this time, the builder is in charge of maintaining the road and the road tolls are supposed to make up for the investment costs.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;But the NHAI wants the builders to be allowed to sell their equity in the project instead of depending on road tolls so that these operators can invest in more projects.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;Singh said in meetings with the Planning Commission on January 30 and later on February 11, the panel agreed to the NHAI&#039;s proposal of allowing builders to exit from finished projects before the end of the contract period.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;In the recorded comments of the commission on an agenda note circulated by the Prime Minister&#039;s Office for a meeting on February 18, the plan panel is shown to be &amp;quot;in favour of relaxing&amp;quot; the rules if necessary. The note, however, says the Union cabinet should take the final decision.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;Singh, drawing attention to the panel&#039;s somersault, notes in his letter: &amp;quot;I am, therefore, surprised to see that when the draft cabinet note has been circulated by the ministry of road transport and highways, the planning commission through its comments has vehemently opposed the relaxation regarding the disinvestment of equity.&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;The letter dated March 26 - days before the quarterly review of the highways by the commission - also says: &amp;quot;Such inconsistencies in the stand of the Planning Commission are causing avoidable confusion. I would, therefore, request you to kindly discuss this matter during your proposed review on 3rd April.&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;The tussle between the plan panel and the NHAI is an ongoing battle. In December 2011, 18 engineers and senior officials of the ministry of roads resigned over the alleged misbehaviour by the adviser to the Planning Commission, Gajender Haldea, in meetings and his interference. The resignations were, however, not accepted. The engineers and Haldea continue to work in their respective posts.&lt;/p&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) 20049,
	&#039;title&#039; =&gt; &#039;Tussle over road exit policy -Sobhana K&#039;,
	&#039;subheading&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
	&#039;description&#039; =&gt; &#039;&lt;div align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;
-The Telegraph
&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The National Highways Authority of India has accused the Planning Commission of &amp;quot;inconsistencies in stand&amp;quot;, saying they are creating confusion and delaying decisions on its projects.
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;
NHAI chairperson R.P. Singh has quoted instances - in a letter to commission member B.K. Chaturvedi - where the Planning Commission had taken a diametrically opposite stand from its earlier position that investors should be allowed to exit from finished projects rather than wait till the agreement period is over.
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;
Singh has also sent a copy of the letter to road secretary Vijay Chibber.
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;
The road sector has been hit by a financial crunch that many builders are facing and there are not many takers for projects. The NHAI has been able to award just around 1,500km of projects against the target of 7,700km for this financial year ending this Sunday. It has been able to construct close to 2,800km (which includes projects from previous years) of road in 2012-2013.
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;
Recently two big players, Andhra Pradesh-based infrastructure giants GMR and GVK backed out of NHAI projects. GMR exited a highway project connecting Rajasthan to Gujarat while GVK terminated one in Madhya Pradesh. Although both firms cited delay in getting environment clearances as reasons for dropping the projects, the NHAI maintains that it was because of lack of funds.
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;
&amp;quot;While GMR needed at least Rs 2,000 crore, GVK required Rs 1,500 crore,&amp;quot; a senior NHAI official said.
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;
The NHAI, therefore, wants that once the road is constructed, a builder should be allowed to pull out his investments or &amp;quot;exit&amp;quot; from a project. The NHAI felt that only then could builders invest in other projects. But for doing this, the existing rules need to be changed.
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;
At present, any builder or contractor who has been awarded a project before 2009 has to be associated with it till the end of the agreement period, which could be anything between 15 and 20 years. During this time, the builder is in charge of maintaining the road and the road tolls are supposed to make up for the investment costs.
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;
But the NHAI wants the builders to be allowed to sell their equity in the project instead of depending on road tolls so that these operators can invest in more projects.
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;
Singh said in meetings with the Planning Commission on January 30 and later on February 11, the panel agreed to the NHAI&#039;s proposal of allowing builders to exit from finished projects before the end of the contract period.
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;
In the recorded comments of the commission on an agenda note circulated by the Prime Minister&#039;s Office for a meeting on February 18, the plan panel is shown to be &amp;quot;in favour of relaxing&amp;quot; the rules if necessary. The note, however, says the Union cabinet should take the final decision.
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;
Singh, drawing attention to the panel&#039;s somersault, notes in his letter: &amp;quot;I am, therefore, surprised to see that when the draft cabinet note has been circulated by the ministry of road transport and highways, the planning commission through its comments has vehemently opposed the relaxation regarding the disinvestment of equity.&amp;quot;
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;
The letter dated March 26 - days before the quarterly review of the highways by the commission - also says: &amp;quot;Such inconsistencies in the stand of the Planning Commission are causing avoidable confusion. I would, therefore, request you to kindly discuss this matter during your proposed review on 3rd April.&amp;quot;
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;
The tussle between the plan panel and the NHAI is an ongoing battle. In December 2011, 18 engineers and senior officials of the ministry of roads resigned over the alleged misbehaviour by the adviser to the Planning Commission, Gajender Haldea, in meetings and his interference. The resignations were, however, not accepted. The engineers and Haldea continue to work in their respective posts.
&lt;/p&gt;&#039;,
	&#039;credit_writer&#039; =&gt; &#039;The Telegraph, 30 March, 2013, http://www.telegraphindia.com/1130330/jsp/nation/story_16727198.jsp#.UVbvVjfcing&#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;tussle-over-road-exit-policy-sobhana-k-20190&#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) 20190,
	&#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) {}
	],
	&#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) 20049
$metaTitle = &#039;LATEST NEWS UPDATES | Tussle over road exit policy -Sobhana K&#039;
$metaKeywords = &#039;Planning Commission,roads,Infrastructure&#039;
$metaDesc = &#039;
-The Telegraph



The National Highways Authority of India has accused the Planning Commission of &amp;quot;inconsistencies in stand&amp;quot;, saying they are creating confusion and delaying decisions on its projects.


NHAI chairperson R.P. Singh has quoted instances - in a letter to commission member...&#039;
$disp = &#039;&lt;div align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;-The Telegraph&lt;/div&gt;&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;&lt;br /&gt;The National Highways Authority of India has accused the Planning Commission of &amp;quot;inconsistencies in stand&amp;quot;, saying they are creating confusion and delaying decisions on its projects.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;NHAI chairperson R.P. Singh has quoted instances - in a letter to commission member B.K. Chaturvedi - where the Planning Commission had taken a diametrically opposite stand from its earlier position that investors should be allowed to exit from finished projects rather than wait till the agreement period is over.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;Singh has also sent a copy of the letter to road secretary Vijay Chibber.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;The road sector has been hit by a financial crunch that many builders are facing and there are not many takers for projects. The NHAI has been able to award just around 1,500km of projects against the target of 7,700km for this financial year ending this Sunday. It has been able to construct close to 2,800km (which includes projects from previous years) of road in 2012-2013.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;Recently two big players, Andhra Pradesh-based infrastructure giants GMR and GVK backed out of NHAI projects. GMR exited a highway project connecting Rajasthan to Gujarat while GVK terminated one in Madhya Pradesh. Although both firms cited delay in getting environment clearances as reasons for dropping the projects, the NHAI maintains that it was because of lack of funds.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;&amp;quot;While GMR needed at least Rs 2,000 crore, GVK required Rs 1,500 crore,&amp;quot; a senior NHAI official said.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;The NHAI, therefore, wants that once the road is constructed, a builder should be allowed to pull out his investments or &amp;quot;exit&amp;quot; from a project. The NHAI felt that only then could builders invest in other projects. But for doing this, the existing rules need to be changed.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;At present, any builder or contractor who has been awarded a project before 2009 has to be associated with it till the end of the agreement period, which could be anything between 15 and 20 years. During this time, the builder is in charge of maintaining the road and the road tolls are supposed to make up for the investment costs.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;But the NHAI wants the builders to be allowed to sell their equity in the project instead of depending on road tolls so that these operators can invest in more projects.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;Singh said in meetings with the Planning Commission on January 30 and later on February 11, the panel agreed to the NHAI&#039;s proposal of allowing builders to exit from finished projects before the end of the contract period.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;In the recorded comments of the commission on an agenda note circulated by the Prime Minister&#039;s Office for a meeting on February 18, the plan panel is shown to be &amp;quot;in favour of relaxing&amp;quot; the rules if necessary. The note, however, says the Union cabinet should take the final decision.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;Singh, drawing attention to the panel&#039;s somersault, notes in his letter: &amp;quot;I am, therefore, surprised to see that when the draft cabinet note has been circulated by the ministry of road transport and highways, the planning commission through its comments has vehemently opposed the relaxation regarding the disinvestment of equity.&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;The letter dated March 26 - days before the quarterly review of the highways by the commission - also says: &amp;quot;Such inconsistencies in the stand of the Planning Commission are causing avoidable confusion. I would, therefore, request you to kindly discuss this matter during your proposed review on 3rd April.&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;The tussle between the plan panel and the NHAI is an ongoing battle. In December 2011, 18 engineers and senior officials of the ministry of roads resigned over the alleged misbehaviour by the adviser to the Planning Commission, Gajender Haldea, in meetings and his interference. The resignations were, however, not accepted. The engineers and Haldea continue to work in their respective posts.&lt;/p&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/tussle-over-road-exit-policy-sobhana-k-20190.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 | Tussle over road exit policy -Sobhana K | Im4change.org</title>
    <meta name="description" content="
-The Telegraph



The National Highways Authority of India has accused the Planning Commission of &quot;inconsistencies in stand&quot;, saying they are creating confusion and delaying decisions on its projects.


NHAI chairperson R.P. Singh has quoted instances - in a letter to commission member..."/>
    <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>Tussle over road exit policy -Sobhana K</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 Telegraph</div><p align="justify"><br />The National Highways Authority of India has accused the Planning Commission of &quot;inconsistencies in stand&quot;, saying they are creating confusion and delaying decisions on its projects.</p><p align="justify">NHAI chairperson R.P. Singh has quoted instances - in a letter to commission member B.K. Chaturvedi - where the Planning Commission had taken a diametrically opposite stand from its earlier position that investors should be allowed to exit from finished projects rather than wait till the agreement period is over.</p><p align="justify">Singh has also sent a copy of the letter to road secretary Vijay Chibber.</p><p align="justify">The road sector has been hit by a financial crunch that many builders are facing and there are not many takers for projects. The NHAI has been able to award just around 1,500km of projects against the target of 7,700km for this financial year ending this Sunday. It has been able to construct close to 2,800km (which includes projects from previous years) of road in 2012-2013.</p><p align="justify">Recently two big players, Andhra Pradesh-based infrastructure giants GMR and GVK backed out of NHAI projects. GMR exited a highway project connecting Rajasthan to Gujarat while GVK terminated one in Madhya Pradesh. Although both firms cited delay in getting environment clearances as reasons for dropping the projects, the NHAI maintains that it was because of lack of funds.</p><p align="justify">&quot;While GMR needed at least Rs 2,000 crore, GVK required Rs 1,500 crore,&quot; a senior NHAI official said.</p><p align="justify">The NHAI, therefore, wants that once the road is constructed, a builder should be allowed to pull out his investments or &quot;exit&quot; from a project. The NHAI felt that only then could builders invest in other projects. But for doing this, the existing rules need to be changed.</p><p align="justify">At present, any builder or contractor who has been awarded a project before 2009 has to be associated with it till the end of the agreement period, which could be anything between 15 and 20 years. During this time, the builder is in charge of maintaining the road and the road tolls are supposed to make up for the investment costs.</p><p align="justify">But the NHAI wants the builders to be allowed to sell their equity in the project instead of depending on road tolls so that these operators can invest in more projects.</p><p align="justify">Singh said in meetings with the Planning Commission on January 30 and later on February 11, the panel agreed to the NHAI's proposal of allowing builders to exit from finished projects before the end of the contract period.</p><p align="justify">In the recorded comments of the commission on an agenda note circulated by the Prime Minister's Office for a meeting on February 18, the plan panel is shown to be &quot;in favour of relaxing&quot; the rules if necessary. The note, however, says the Union cabinet should take the final decision.</p><p align="justify">Singh, drawing attention to the panel's somersault, notes in his letter: &quot;I am, therefore, surprised to see that when the draft cabinet note has been circulated by the ministry of road transport and highways, the planning commission through its comments has vehemently opposed the relaxation regarding the disinvestment of equity.&quot;</p><p align="justify">The letter dated March 26 - days before the quarterly review of the highways by the commission - also says: &quot;Such inconsistencies in the stand of the Planning Commission are causing avoidable confusion. I would, therefore, request you to kindly discuss this matter during your proposed review on 3rd April.&quot;</p><p align="justify">The tussle between the plan panel and the NHAI is an ongoing battle. In December 2011, 18 engineers and senior officials of the ministry of roads resigned over the alleged misbehaviour by the adviser to the Planning Commission, Gajender Haldea, in meetings and his interference. The resignations were, however, not accepted. The engineers and Haldea continue to work in their respective posts.</p>               </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) 20049,
		'title' => 'Tussle over road exit policy -Sobhana K',
		'subheading' => '',
		'description' => '<div align="justify">
-The Telegraph
</div>
<p align="justify">
<br />
The National Highways Authority of India has accused the Planning Commission of &quot;inconsistencies in stand&quot;, saying they are creating confusion and delaying decisions on its projects.
</p>
<p align="justify">
NHAI chairperson R.P. Singh has quoted instances - in a letter to commission member B.K. Chaturvedi - where the Planning Commission had taken a diametrically opposite stand from its earlier position that investors should be allowed to exit from finished projects rather than wait till the agreement period is over.
</p>
<p align="justify">
Singh has also sent a copy of the letter to road secretary Vijay Chibber.
</p>
<p align="justify">
The road sector has been hit by a financial crunch that many builders are facing and there are not many takers for projects. The NHAI has been able to award just around 1,500km of projects against the target of 7,700km for this financial year ending this Sunday. It has been able to construct close to 2,800km (which includes projects from previous years) of road in 2012-2013.
</p>
<p align="justify">
Recently two big players, Andhra Pradesh-based infrastructure giants GMR and GVK backed out of NHAI projects. GMR exited a highway project connecting Rajasthan to Gujarat while GVK terminated one in Madhya Pradesh. Although both firms cited delay in getting environment clearances as reasons for dropping the projects, the NHAI maintains that it was because of lack of funds.
</p>
<p align="justify">
&quot;While GMR needed at least Rs 2,000 crore, GVK required Rs 1,500 crore,&quot; a senior NHAI official said.
</p>
<p align="justify">
The NHAI, therefore, wants that once the road is constructed, a builder should be allowed to pull out his investments or &quot;exit&quot; from a project. The NHAI felt that only then could builders invest in other projects. But for doing this, the existing rules need to be changed.
</p>
<p align="justify">
At present, any builder or contractor who has been awarded a project before 2009 has to be associated with it till the end of the agreement period, which could be anything between 15 and 20 years. During this time, the builder is in charge of maintaining the road and the road tolls are supposed to make up for the investment costs.
</p>
<p align="justify">
But the NHAI wants the builders to be allowed to sell their equity in the project instead of depending on road tolls so that these operators can invest in more projects.
</p>
<p align="justify">
Singh said in meetings with the Planning Commission on January 30 and later on February 11, the panel agreed to the NHAI's proposal of allowing builders to exit from finished projects before the end of the contract period.
</p>
<p align="justify">
In the recorded comments of the commission on an agenda note circulated by the Prime Minister's Office for a meeting on February 18, the plan panel is shown to be &quot;in favour of relaxing&quot; the rules if necessary. The note, however, says the Union cabinet should take the final decision.
</p>
<p align="justify">
Singh, drawing attention to the panel's somersault, notes in his letter: &quot;I am, therefore, surprised to see that when the draft cabinet note has been circulated by the ministry of road transport and highways, the planning commission through its comments has vehemently opposed the relaxation regarding the disinvestment of equity.&quot;
</p>
<p align="justify">
The letter dated March 26 - days before the quarterly review of the highways by the commission - also says: &quot;Such inconsistencies in the stand of the Planning Commission are causing avoidable confusion. I would, therefore, request you to kindly discuss this matter during your proposed review on 3rd April.&quot;
</p>
<p align="justify">
The tussle between the plan panel and the NHAI is an ongoing battle. In December 2011, 18 engineers and senior officials of the ministry of roads resigned over the alleged misbehaviour by the adviser to the Planning Commission, Gajender Haldea, in meetings and his interference. The resignations were, however, not accepted. The engineers and Haldea continue to work in their respective posts.
</p>',
		'credit_writer' => 'The Telegraph, 30 March, 2013, http://www.telegraphindia.com/1130330/jsp/nation/story_16727198.jsp#.UVbvVjfcing',
		'article_img' => '',
		'article_img_thumb' => '',
		'status' => (int) 1,
		'show_on_home' => (int) 1,
		'lang' => 'EN',
		'category_id' => (int) 16,
		'tag_keyword' => '',
		'seo_url' => 'tussle-over-road-exit-policy-sobhana-k-20190',
		'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) 20190,
		'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) 20049,
	'metaTitle' => 'LATEST NEWS UPDATES | Tussle over road exit policy -Sobhana K',
	'metaKeywords' => 'Planning Commission,roads,Infrastructure',
	'metaDesc' => '
-The Telegraph



The National Highways Authority of India has accused the Planning Commission of &quot;inconsistencies in stand&quot;, saying they are creating confusion and delaying decisions on its projects.


NHAI chairperson R.P. Singh has quoted instances - in a letter to commission member...',
	'disp' => '<div align="justify">-The Telegraph</div><p align="justify"><br />The National Highways Authority of India has accused the Planning Commission of &quot;inconsistencies in stand&quot;, saying they are creating confusion and delaying decisions on its projects.</p><p align="justify">NHAI chairperson R.P. Singh has quoted instances - in a letter to commission member B.K. Chaturvedi - where the Planning Commission had taken a diametrically opposite stand from its earlier position that investors should be allowed to exit from finished projects rather than wait till the agreement period is over.</p><p align="justify">Singh has also sent a copy of the letter to road secretary Vijay Chibber.</p><p align="justify">The road sector has been hit by a financial crunch that many builders are facing and there are not many takers for projects. The NHAI has been able to award just around 1,500km of projects against the target of 7,700km for this financial year ending this Sunday. It has been able to construct close to 2,800km (which includes projects from previous years) of road in 2012-2013.</p><p align="justify">Recently two big players, Andhra Pradesh-based infrastructure giants GMR and GVK backed out of NHAI projects. GMR exited a highway project connecting Rajasthan to Gujarat while GVK terminated one in Madhya Pradesh. Although both firms cited delay in getting environment clearances as reasons for dropping the projects, the NHAI maintains that it was because of lack of funds.</p><p align="justify">&quot;While GMR needed at least Rs 2,000 crore, GVK required Rs 1,500 crore,&quot; a senior NHAI official said.</p><p align="justify">The NHAI, therefore, wants that once the road is constructed, a builder should be allowed to pull out his investments or &quot;exit&quot; from a project. The NHAI felt that only then could builders invest in other projects. But for doing this, the existing rules need to be changed.</p><p align="justify">At present, any builder or contractor who has been awarded a project before 2009 has to be associated with it till the end of the agreement period, which could be anything between 15 and 20 years. During this time, the builder is in charge of maintaining the road and the road tolls are supposed to make up for the investment costs.</p><p align="justify">But the NHAI wants the builders to be allowed to sell their equity in the project instead of depending on road tolls so that these operators can invest in more projects.</p><p align="justify">Singh said in meetings with the Planning Commission on January 30 and later on February 11, the panel agreed to the NHAI's proposal of allowing builders to exit from finished projects before the end of the contract period.</p><p align="justify">In the recorded comments of the commission on an agenda note circulated by the Prime Minister's Office for a meeting on February 18, the plan panel is shown to be &quot;in favour of relaxing&quot; the rules if necessary. The note, however, says the Union cabinet should take the final decision.</p><p align="justify">Singh, drawing attention to the panel's somersault, notes in his letter: &quot;I am, therefore, surprised to see that when the draft cabinet note has been circulated by the ministry of road transport and highways, the planning commission through its comments has vehemently opposed the relaxation regarding the disinvestment of equity.&quot;</p><p align="justify">The letter dated March 26 - days before the quarterly review of the highways by the commission - also says: &quot;Such inconsistencies in the stand of the Planning Commission are causing avoidable confusion. I would, therefore, request you to kindly discuss this matter during your proposed review on 3rd April.&quot;</p><p align="justify">The tussle between the plan panel and the NHAI is an ongoing battle. In December 2011, 18 engineers and senior officials of the ministry of roads resigned over the alleged misbehaviour by the adviser to the Planning Commission, Gajender Haldea, in meetings and his interference. The resignations were, however, not accepted. The engineers and Haldea continue to work in their respective posts.</p>',
	'lang' => 'English',
	'SITE_URL' => 'https://im4change.in/',
	'site_title' => 'im4change',
	'adminprix' => 'admin'
]
$article_current = object(App\Model\Entity\Article) {

	'id' => (int) 20049,
	'title' => 'Tussle over road exit policy -Sobhana K',
	'subheading' => '',
	'description' => '<div align="justify">
-The Telegraph
</div>
<p align="justify">
<br />
The National Highways Authority of India has accused the Planning Commission of &quot;inconsistencies in stand&quot;, saying they are creating confusion and delaying decisions on its projects.
</p>
<p align="justify">
NHAI chairperson R.P. Singh has quoted instances - in a letter to commission member B.K. Chaturvedi - where the Planning Commission had taken a diametrically opposite stand from its earlier position that investors should be allowed to exit from finished projects rather than wait till the agreement period is over.
</p>
<p align="justify">
Singh has also sent a copy of the letter to road secretary Vijay Chibber.
</p>
<p align="justify">
The road sector has been hit by a financial crunch that many builders are facing and there are not many takers for projects. The NHAI has been able to award just around 1,500km of projects against the target of 7,700km for this financial year ending this Sunday. It has been able to construct close to 2,800km (which includes projects from previous years) of road in 2012-2013.
</p>
<p align="justify">
Recently two big players, Andhra Pradesh-based infrastructure giants GMR and GVK backed out of NHAI projects. GMR exited a highway project connecting Rajasthan to Gujarat while GVK terminated one in Madhya Pradesh. Although both firms cited delay in getting environment clearances as reasons for dropping the projects, the NHAI maintains that it was because of lack of funds.
</p>
<p align="justify">
&quot;While GMR needed at least Rs 2,000 crore, GVK required Rs 1,500 crore,&quot; a senior NHAI official said.
</p>
<p align="justify">
The NHAI, therefore, wants that once the road is constructed, a builder should be allowed to pull out his investments or &quot;exit&quot; from a project. The NHAI felt that only then could builders invest in other projects. But for doing this, the existing rules need to be changed.
</p>
<p align="justify">
At present, any builder or contractor who has been awarded a project before 2009 has to be associated with it till the end of the agreement period, which could be anything between 15 and 20 years. During this time, the builder is in charge of maintaining the road and the road tolls are supposed to make up for the investment costs.
</p>
<p align="justify">
But the NHAI wants the builders to be allowed to sell their equity in the project instead of depending on road tolls so that these operators can invest in more projects.
</p>
<p align="justify">
Singh said in meetings with the Planning Commission on January 30 and later on February 11, the panel agreed to the NHAI's proposal of allowing builders to exit from finished projects before the end of the contract period.
</p>
<p align="justify">
In the recorded comments of the commission on an agenda note circulated by the Prime Minister's Office for a meeting on February 18, the plan panel is shown to be &quot;in favour of relaxing&quot; the rules if necessary. The note, however, says the Union cabinet should take the final decision.
</p>
<p align="justify">
Singh, drawing attention to the panel's somersault, notes in his letter: &quot;I am, therefore, surprised to see that when the draft cabinet note has been circulated by the ministry of road transport and highways, the planning commission through its comments has vehemently opposed the relaxation regarding the disinvestment of equity.&quot;
</p>
<p align="justify">
The letter dated March 26 - days before the quarterly review of the highways by the commission - also says: &quot;Such inconsistencies in the stand of the Planning Commission are causing avoidable confusion. I would, therefore, request you to kindly discuss this matter during your proposed review on 3rd April.&quot;
</p>
<p align="justify">
The tussle between the plan panel and the NHAI is an ongoing battle. In December 2011, 18 engineers and senior officials of the ministry of roads resigned over the alleged misbehaviour by the adviser to the Planning Commission, Gajender Haldea, in meetings and his interference. The resignations were, however, not accepted. The engineers and Haldea continue to work in their respective posts.
</p>',
	'credit_writer' => 'The Telegraph, 30 March, 2013, http://www.telegraphindia.com/1130330/jsp/nation/story_16727198.jsp#.UVbvVjfcing',
	'article_img' => '',
	'article_img_thumb' => '',
	'status' => (int) 1,
	'show_on_home' => (int) 1,
	'lang' => 'EN',
	'category_id' => (int) 16,
	'tag_keyword' => '',
	'seo_url' => 'tussle-over-road-exit-policy-sobhana-k-20190',
	'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) 20190,
	'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) {}
	],
	'category' => object(App\Model\Entity\Category) {},
	'[new]' => false,
	'[accessible]' => [
		'*' => true,
		'id' => false
	],
	'[dirty]' => [],
	'[original]' => [],
	'[virtual]' => [],
	'[hasErrors]' => false,
	'[errors]' => [],
	'[invalid]' => [],
	'[repository]' => 'Articles'

}
$articleid = (int) 20049
$metaTitle = 'LATEST NEWS UPDATES | Tussle over road exit policy -Sobhana K'
$metaKeywords = 'Planning Commission,roads,Infrastructure'
$metaDesc = '
-The Telegraph



The National Highways Authority of India has accused the Planning Commission of &quot;inconsistencies in stand&quot;, saying they are creating confusion and delaying decisions on its projects.


NHAI chairperson R.P. Singh has quoted instances - in a letter to commission member...'
$disp = '<div align="justify">-The Telegraph</div><p align="justify"><br />The National Highways Authority of India has accused the Planning Commission of &quot;inconsistencies in stand&quot;, saying they are creating confusion and delaying decisions on its projects.</p><p align="justify">NHAI chairperson R.P. Singh has quoted instances - in a letter to commission member B.K. Chaturvedi - where the Planning Commission had taken a diametrically opposite stand from its earlier position that investors should be allowed to exit from finished projects rather than wait till the agreement period is over.</p><p align="justify">Singh has also sent a copy of the letter to road secretary Vijay Chibber.</p><p align="justify">The road sector has been hit by a financial crunch that many builders are facing and there are not many takers for projects. The NHAI has been able to award just around 1,500km of projects against the target of 7,700km for this financial year ending this Sunday. It has been able to construct close to 2,800km (which includes projects from previous years) of road in 2012-2013.</p><p align="justify">Recently two big players, Andhra Pradesh-based infrastructure giants GMR and GVK backed out of NHAI projects. GMR exited a highway project connecting Rajasthan to Gujarat while GVK terminated one in Madhya Pradesh. Although both firms cited delay in getting environment clearances as reasons for dropping the projects, the NHAI maintains that it was because of lack of funds.</p><p align="justify">&quot;While GMR needed at least Rs 2,000 crore, GVK required Rs 1,500 crore,&quot; a senior NHAI official said.</p><p align="justify">The NHAI, therefore, wants that once the road is constructed, a builder should be allowed to pull out his investments or &quot;exit&quot; from a project. The NHAI felt that only then could builders invest in other projects. But for doing this, the existing rules need to be changed.</p><p align="justify">At present, any builder or contractor who has been awarded a project before 2009 has to be associated with it till the end of the agreement period, which could be anything between 15 and 20 years. During this time, the builder is in charge of maintaining the road and the road tolls are supposed to make up for the investment costs.</p><p align="justify">But the NHAI wants the builders to be allowed to sell their equity in the project instead of depending on road tolls so that these operators can invest in more projects.</p><p align="justify">Singh said in meetings with the Planning Commission on January 30 and later on February 11, the panel agreed to the NHAI's proposal of allowing builders to exit from finished projects before the end of the contract period.</p><p align="justify">In the recorded comments of the commission on an agenda note circulated by the Prime Minister's Office for a meeting on February 18, the plan panel is shown to be &quot;in favour of relaxing&quot; the rules if necessary. The note, however, says the Union cabinet should take the final decision.</p><p align="justify">Singh, drawing attention to the panel's somersault, notes in his letter: &quot;I am, therefore, surprised to see that when the draft cabinet note has been circulated by the ministry of road transport and highways, the planning commission through its comments has vehemently opposed the relaxation regarding the disinvestment of equity.&quot;</p><p align="justify">The letter dated March 26 - days before the quarterly review of the highways by the commission - also says: &quot;Such inconsistencies in the stand of the Planning Commission are causing avoidable confusion. I would, therefore, request you to kindly discuss this matter during your proposed review on 3rd April.&quot;</p><p align="justify">The tussle between the plan panel and the NHAI is an ongoing battle. In December 2011, 18 engineers and senior officials of the ministry of roads resigned over the alleged misbehaviour by the adviser to the Planning Commission, Gajender Haldea, in meetings and his interference. The resignations were, however, not accepted. The engineers and Haldea continue to work in their respective posts.</p>'
$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

Tussle over road exit policy -Sobhana K

-The Telegraph The National Highways Authority of India has accused the Planning Commission of "inconsistencies in stand", saying they are creating confusion and delaying decisions on its projects. NHAI chairperson R.P. Singh has quoted instances - in a letter to commission member B.K. Chaturvedi - where the Planning Commission had taken a diametrically opposite stand from its earlier position that investors should be allowed to exit from finished projects rather than wait till the agreement period is over. Singh has also sent a copy of the letter to road secretary Vijay Chibber. The road sector has been hit by a financial crunch that many builders are facing and there are not many takers for projects. The NHAI has been able to award just around 1,500km of projects against the target of 7,700km for this financial year ending this Sunday. It has been able to construct close to 2,800km (which includes projects from previous years) of road in 2012-2013. Recently two big players, Andhra Pradesh-based infrastructure giants GMR and GVK backed out of NHAI projects. GMR exited a highway project connecting Rajasthan to Gujarat while GVK terminated one in Madhya Pradesh. Although both firms cited delay in getting environment clearances as reasons for dropping the projects, the NHAI maintains that it was because of lack of funds. "While GMR needed at least Rs 2,000 crore, GVK required Rs 1,500 crore," a senior NHAI official said. The NHAI, therefore, wants that once the road is constructed, a builder should be allowed to pull out his investments or "exit" from a project. The NHAI felt that only then could builders invest in other projects. But for doing this, the existing rules need to be changed. At present, any builder or contractor who has been awarded a project before 2009 has to be associated with it till the end of the agreement period, which could be anything between 15 and 20 years. During this time, the builder is in charge of maintaining the road and the road tolls are supposed to make up for the investment costs. But the NHAI wants the builders to be allowed to sell their equity in the project instead of depending on road tolls so that these operators can invest in more projects. Singh said in meetings with the Planning Commission on January 30 and later on February 11, the panel agreed to the NHAI's proposal of allowing builders to exit from finished projects before the end of the contract period. In the recorded comments of the commission on an agenda note circulated by the Prime Minister's Office for a meeting on February 18, the plan panel is shown to be "in favour of relaxing" the rules if necessary. The note, however, says the Union cabinet should take the final decision. Singh, drawing attention to the panel's somersault, notes in his letter: "I am, therefore, surprised to see that when the draft cabinet note has been circulated by the ministry of road transport and highways, the planning commission through its comments has vehemently opposed the relaxation regarding the disinvestment of equity." The letter dated March 26 - days before the quarterly review of the highways by the commission - also says: "Such inconsistencies in the stand of the Planning Commission are causing avoidable confusion. I would, therefore, request you to kindly discuss this matter during your proposed review on 3rd April." The tussle between the plan panel and the NHAI is an ongoing battle. In December 2011, 18 engineers and senior officials of the ministry of roads resigned over the alleged misbehaviour by the adviser to the Planning Commission, Gajender Haldea, in meetings and his interference. The resignations were, however, not accepted. The engineers and Haldea continue to work in their respective posts.