The Bhubaneswar Development Authority (BDA) and the Cuttack Development Authority (CDA) were created for the purpose of ensuring planned and systematic development of the areas coming under their jurisdictions.
Both the authorities are required to undertake planning, regulation and allotment of plots and buildings for residential as well as commercial use. land is a scarce and valuable resource. Government land required for residential and other purposes within the city limits of Bhubaneswar and Cuttack are leased by the General Administration (GA) and Revenue Departments to the BDA and the CDA on payment of prescribed premium, and the same, after development, are further leased to public by these authorities.
The Comptroller & Auditor General (CAG) of India in its Report on General and Social Sector (Volume-3) for the year ended March 2012 includes a Performance Audit of the activities of the BDA and the CDA, which is distressing and disturbing. The preparations of Zonal Development Plans (ZDPs) were grossly neglected. The CDA did not have till 2012 a Comprehensive Development Plan and consequently is yet to formulate the ZDPs. The BDA entrusted preparation of ZDPs to IIT, Kharagpur to be completed by July 2012, which by August 2013 had submitted ZDPs for only four zones out of the 14 entrusted to them. The insensitivity of the administration towards economically weaker sections of the community stands demonstrated in non-reservation of houses for members of socially and economically backward classes.
During 2002 to 2012, 10 schemes were developed by the BDA and the CDA, but no plots or houses were reserved for the EWS category. This happened despite a 10-per cent reservation being mandated in S. 22(4) of the ODA Act, 1982 and also in some of the lease agreements executed between the Revenue Department and the Development Authorities.
During 2002 to 2012, lands measuring 113.431 acres were allotted to the BDA for development of housing schemes. By February 2013, the BDA had utilised only 2.685 acres of land and the remaining 110.746 acres remained unutilised and still remained buried in the planning process. In allotment of houses and plots, there was an absence of clear criteria and policy. On account of lack of an appropriate and transparent policy regulating the field, there were large numbers of irregular allotments of assets. In five housing schemes of the BDA, though the scheme contained provision prohibiting one person to apply for more than one unit within a scheme, any condition prohibiting application by the spouses in that scheme was not available in the brochure.
The audit noticed that 29 persons were unauthorisedly allotted (2002 to 2012) additional assets of the value of Rs 6.79 crore by the BDA. In these cases, the allottees and / or their spouses were already allotted assets in earlier schemes/same scheme.
Similarly in the CDA, eight persons were allotted plots valued Rs 24.34 lakh despite the fact that their spouses were also allotted assets under the same scheme. Seven persons were allotted more than one plot/house by both BDA and CDA in their favour. The scheme brochure conditions require furnishing an affidavit from applicant citing that he/she or his/her spouse did not possess a house/plot in Bhubaneswar. The audit noticed that the BDA did not have a database of the allottees of plots/houses allotted in its own schemes. As a result, in three housing schemes, the BDA allotted more than one plot/house valued at Rs 61.08 lakh in the same/different housing schemes to nine persons on the basis of affidavits submitted by them which were later proved to be false.
Group Housing Cooperative Societies were allotted land without there being any policy and guideline regulating the same and the original schemes/brochure did not have any provisions for such allotment. Under the discretionary quota (DQ), during 2002-2010, the BDA allotted 185 plots/buildings and the CDA 449 plots /buildings. Identification of the allottees under the discretionary quota was found by the CAG to be arbitrary as no criteria for the same were prescribed or specified. Applications for allotment under the DQ are made on plain paper without supporting documents. Multiple allotments were made in favour of the same person or his immediate family members. Assets worth Rs 31.63 crore were involved in allotment through the DQ. Allottees under the DQ transferred some of the assets to third parties indicative of speculatory investment. DQ allottees transferred the assets to other persons and were thereafter beneficiaries of another allotment under the DQ. The Government admitted that there should have been a well-calibrated framework for exercising DQ allotments instead of operating on a case-to-case basis. The DQ allotments were discontinued in 2011.
A large number of constructions has been catalogued by the CAG to be without any authority under law and were liable to be demolished. The demolitions have not been carried out over the last few years. Though an ab-initio illegal construction cannot be legitimised by any subsequent action, in order to favour the mighty few, the BDA records conveniently state “approval of plan in progress”. In the case of multi-stories there were several violations. lands were approved for apartments under the category of non-apartment; high-rise buildings did not have adequate provision of parking place and some of them were without approach roads. A private building plan was approved on about an acre of land belonging to the BDA.
Instances galore have been catalogued by the CAG indicating irregular approval of building plans, lack of approval or improper approval for high-rise buildings, abuse of the amnesty scheme, multistory complexes being cleared without required permission from the Union MoEF and rank encroachers being favoured with illegal regularisation.
It is but natural for any reasonable person to be shocked with the state of affairs in the two Development Authorities. If you have the clout, you could get away with anything while the Authorities would close their eyes as mute witnesses. If you are the underprivileged, their doors could be closed for you – denying you the Fundamental Right of dignity and shelter. And this definitely concerns us.
(The writer, a Senior Advocate, is a former All India Service officer, a former diplomat, a former editor and a former Advocate General of Odisha. jayantdas@hotmail.com)