 "Odisha counters CAG claim on land allotment to industries")
The Odisha government has contested the claim of the Comptroller & Auditor General of India (CAG) that commitments for land were made to the MoU (memorandum of understanding) signed companies without assessing availability of land.
In its reply filed to the office of the CAG, the state industries department reasoned that MoU is a tool for investment promotion which accords a degree of comfort to the promoter to initiate project development in the state. This is done without overruling the provisions of other statutory frameworks applicable to an industrial project such as land acquisition and raw material linkages.
“Any commitment made by the government in such MoU is subject to provisions and processes laid down by the respective Act/Rules. For example, public consultation is done for obtaining different clearances as well as acquisition of land through mechanisms such as public hearing, gram sabha and Rehabilitation & Periphery Development Advisory Committee (RPDAC). The audit observation that feasibility of land acquisition and obtaining views of land owners were not considered before signing of MoUs is not rightly placed. Such matters are duly considered as per provisions in the Land Acquisition Act-1894,” Nirupama Mallick, joint secretary (industries) wrote to Accountant General-Odisha.
The office of the CAG had slammed the state government for entering into MoUs (memorandum of understanding) with industrial players without any policy or guidelines for assessing the need for industries.
The CAG which is conducting performance audit of commitments made to MoU signed companies on land, water and minerals, noted that pre-requisites for signing of MoUs with promoter companies was not prescribed. Besides, monitoring mechanism on implementation of various commitments by both the state government and private promoters made in these MoUs was also not prescribed.
The central auditor also pointed out that while MoU was signed with some promoters, yet no MoU was signed with Utkal Aluminium International Ltd, Mid-East Integrated Steel, Saraf Agencies Ltd and Dinabandhu Steel & Power Ltd but land and other facilities were provided to all.
Countering this stand of the CAG, the state government held that an MoU is not an essential condition for a project to be grounded in Odisha and so long a project has received the approval of the competent authorities, the government is bound to provided land and other facilities for implementing the project.
In its reply filed to the office of the CAG, the state industries department reasoned that MoU is a tool for investment promotion which accords a degree of comfort to the promoter to initiate project development in the state. This is done without overruling the provisions of other statutory frameworks applicable to an industrial project such as land acquisition and raw material linkages.
“Any commitment made by the government in such MoU is subject to provisions and processes laid down by the respective Act/Rules. For example, public consultation is done for obtaining different clearances as well as acquisition of land through mechanisms such as public hearing, gram sabha and Rehabilitation & Periphery Development Advisory Committee (RPDAC). The audit observation that feasibility of land acquisition and obtaining views of land owners were not considered before signing of MoUs is not rightly placed. Such matters are duly considered as per provisions in the Land Acquisition Act-1894,” Nirupama Mallick, joint secretary (industries) wrote to Accountant General-Odisha.
The office of the CAG had slammed the state government for entering into MoUs (memorandum of understanding) with industrial players without any policy or guidelines for assessing the need for industries.
The CAG which is conducting performance audit of commitments made to MoU signed companies on land, water and minerals, noted that pre-requisites for signing of MoUs with promoter companies was not prescribed. Besides, monitoring mechanism on implementation of various commitments by both the state government and private promoters made in these MoUs was also not prescribed.
The central auditor also pointed out that while MoU was signed with some promoters, yet no MoU was signed with Utkal Aluminium International Ltd, Mid-East Integrated Steel, Saraf Agencies Ltd and Dinabandhu Steel & Power Ltd but land and other facilities were provided to all.
Countering this stand of the CAG, the state government held that an MoU is not an essential condition for a project to be grounded in Odisha and so long a project has received the approval of the competent authorities, the government is bound to provided land and other facilities for implementing the project.