In 3 years, Vadra firms reaped up to 600% profit in land deals

RAJASTHAN | Pattern to profits: Firms continued to buy land at old rates in areas where they were making profit

The Indian Express, 27 November, 2014

Gajner in Bikaner, one of the villages where Vadra firms bought land

Three companies owned by Robert Vadra, son-in-law of Congress president Sonia Gandhi, made profits up to 600 per cent within three years of investment in real estate in Rajasthan.

Official records accessed by The Indian Express also show that even as Vadra’s firms were selling land in 2012 at  three to seven times the price they bought it for in 2009-10, they were buying land in the same areas at, roughly, the 2009-10 rates.

In all, Vadra’s Sky Light Realty, Sky Light Hospitality and Blue Breeze Trading executed 58 land deeds in Bikaner’s Kolayat tehsil between 2009 and 2013.

A scrutiny of these deeds reveals that Vadra’s firms bought 197 hectares in 2009-10 at a price that ranged from Rs 44,000 per hectare to 1 lakh per hectare. Almost all this land was sold off in 2012 at prices ranging from Rs 2.47 lakh per hectare to Rs 7.4 lakh per hectare.

Within two months of the last sale in 2012, Vadra’s firms again bought 214 hectares at prices ranging from Rs 80,000 per hectare to Rs 1.21 lakh per hectare.

Those who bought this land included nephews of a former Rajasthan finance minister and two individuals who were witness to land deals of the companies.

Details of the transactions of the three Vadra firms, as per records:

Sky Light Realty

In 2010, Sky Light Realty Pvt Ltd bought 60.153 hectares in eight deals for Rs 46 lakh — at an average of Rs 76,000 per hectare. Between March and May 2012, the company sold the land in 10 deals for Rs 2.96 crore — at an average of Rs 4.7 lakh per hectare, over six times the price it paid in 2010. It made a huge profit when it sold 29.36 hectares, bought for Rs 28 lakh in March 2010, to Fonroche Saaras Energy Pvt Ltd for Rs 199.56 lakh in May 2012.

Incidentally, Sky Light Realty sold the first lot of land in eight deals in March-April 2012 at the price of Rs 2.47 lakh per hectare. Within days, the price jumped to Rs 6.79 lakh per hectare when the company sold 3.25 hectares to one Rushipal of Haryana in May 2012. The same month, Mumbai-based Fonroche bought 29.36 hectares from Sky Light Realty, and 3.25 hectare from Rushipal, at the rate of Rs 6.79 lakh per hectare.

While Sky Light Realty sold land for an average of Rs 4.72 lakh per hectare between March and May 2012, it purchased another 71.47 hectares from village residents in four deals during June-July 2012 at an average price of Rs 82,000 per hectare. The company still holds this land, marginally above the land ceiling.

Sky Light Hospitality

In January 2010, Sky Light Hospitality Pvt Ltd bought 69.55 hectares in two deals for Rs 72 lakh — at a little over Rs 1 lakh per hectare. In January 2012, it sold the land in two separate deals to Delhi’s Allegeny Finlease Pvt Ltd for Rs 5 crore — at Rs 7.41 lakh per hectare, seven times the price paid two years ago.

In four deals in June 2012, Sky Light Hospitality purchased nearly 70 hectares at an average of Rs 80,000 per hectare — less than what it paid in 2009. Barring land sold for Rs 6 lakh to one Meetu Agarwal of Bikaner in January 2013, ostensibly to bring down the company’s holding below the ceiling limit, land purchased in 2012 is still with Sky Light Hospitality.

Blue Breeze Trading

In June 2009, Blue Breeze Trading Pvt Ltd purchased 50 hectares in four deals in Kolayat for Rs 40 lakh at an average price of Rs 80,000 per hectare. The company picked up another 17.40 hectare in April 2010 for Rs 7.70 lakh at Rs 44,000 per hectare.

In April 2012, Blue Breeze Trading sold 41.39 hectare to VCB Trading Pvt Ltd, New Delhi, in three lots for a little over Rs 1 crore — at an average of Rs 2.47 lakh per hectare. Next month, it sold the remaining 26 hectares to Fonroche in two deals for Rs 1.77 crore at an average of Rs 6.79 lakh per hectare. In all, Blue Breeze made Rs 2.79 crore after investing Rs 47.7 lakh — the return almost 600 per cent in less than three years.

In June that year, Blue Breeze Trading purchased another 71.96 hectares in Kolayat for Rs 87.50 lakh — at an average of Rs 1.21 lakh per hectare. The entire holding was sold to nine individuals — eight in Bikaner and one in Faridabad — through 11 deals made in January and May 2013.

Centre sits on royalty slabs for bio resources, loses Rs 25,000 cr a year

The Indian Express, 17 November, 2014

It took the National Biodiversity Authority (NBA) six years, 18 drafts and a prod from the National Green Tribunal (NGT) to finalise the Guidelines for Access and Benefit Sharing (ABS) this August. Three months on, it is yet to notify the rules that would allow it to collect from domestic and foreign companies 0.1-1 per cent of their ex-factory gross sales of products using biological resources and traditional knowledge.

A conservative estimate by the industry and Ministry of Environment and Forests (MoEF) sources puts this loss at Rs 20-25,000 crore annually. This money would go to the National Biodiversity Fund and to communities from whom such resources or knowledge have been accessed by the companies.

A wide range of industries — biotech, pharma, forestry, herbal, sugar, distilleries, food processing, soya, textile, fisheries, sericulture etc — use biological resources. Globally, the potential value of biological diversity and genetic resources is pegged at around US $1 trillion.

Fair and equitable sharing of benefits accrued from utilisation of genetic resources is a key objective of the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD), adopted in June 1992 and ratified by 194 countries, including India. In compliance of the CBD, the Biological Diversity Act was passed in 2002 and the Biological Diversity Rules followed in 2004. But, a decade later, India is still to notify the quantum of revenue companies need to share, under the Act, with local communities and for biodiversity conservation.

The Indian Express accessed the ABS Guidelines prepared by the NBA’s core expert group and vetted by the Law Ministry. Providing for benefit-sharing in both monetary and non-monetary modes, the guidelines have slabs that should encourage small companies.

Subject to last-minute modifications by Environment Minister Prakash Javadekar, whose nod is awaited for the much-delayed notification, the benefit-sharing slabs for domestic companies are 0.1 per cent, 0.2 per cent and 0.5 per cent on annual ex-factory gross sales of a product, depending on if the sales are less than Rs 1 crore, between Rs 1-5 crore and above Rs 5 crore, respectively. Foreign companies have to pay double the rate — so between 0.2 per cent and 1 per cent — in the three slabs.

For bulk exports, benefit-sharing will be 3-5 per cent of the total Free on Board value of resources. For different categories of transfer of research and Intellectual Property Rights, benefit-sharing ranges from 0.5-5 per cent.

“The thrust is on a sectoral approach. For example, it allows lowest rates for innovations based on research in agro-bio resources that are likely to benefit the farmer. Also, we have been liberal in interpreting the provisions of access, because benefits can only be generated through greater but sustainable use,” said a member of the NBA panel that worked on the guidelines.

Once notified, the guidelines will be reviewed periodically, at least once in five years. The monetary benefits will go to the National Biodiversity Fund for sharing with 28 state biodiversity boards, more than 32,000 local biodiversity management committees and specific individuals or communities from whom biological resources or traditional knowledge were accessed.

Under the Biodiversity Act, foreign companies require the NBA’s prior approval to access India’s biological resources and traditional knowledge. Domestic companies do not need prior approval but must intimate the state biodiversity board concerned. In the absence of notified guidelines, few companies, or even state biodiversity boards, have complied with these provisions. The NBA itself has collected only Rs 42 lakh under benefit-sharing since it was set up in 2003.

Last year, several companies had approached the NGT against the Madhya Pradesh biodiversity board that issued notices for benefit-sharing, arguing that no other state was implementing the ABS provisions of the Biodiversity Act. On August 29, the NGT gave the NBA six weeks to notify the ABS Guidelines. Even though the draft was cleared by the Law Ministry on time, the MoEF and NBA missed the deadline.

According to sources, successive governments have been under pressure from powerful industry lobbies to hold the guidelines back. “It saves both Indian and foreign companies thousands of crores that they would have to shell out as royalties every year,” noted an MoEF official. Repeated attempts to issue notices to companies dealing in genetically modified seeds without prior approval were stonewalled within the ministry, the official added.

Both Javadekar and Hem Pande, MoEF additional secretary who holds temporary charge as NBA chairman, refused to explain the delay. The NBA is without a full-time chairman since Balakrishna Pasupati was forced to resign in February, six months before his term as NBA chairman ended.

As reported by The Indian Express in August, then MoEF secretary V Rajagopalan had got himself selected for the post, a move subsequently scrapped by the Appointments Committee of the Cabinet, comprising the PM and Home Minister. Neither Javadekar nor Pande responded to queries on if the selection process would be reinitiated and if the absence of a full-time chairman was affecting the NBA’s functions.

CVC in the dark a month after Health Ministry appointed CVO

The Indian Express, 11 November, 2014

The Health Ministry has appointed a new chief vigilance officer without informing the Central Vigilance Commission (CVC), barely three months after it ousted AIIMS CVO Sanjiv Chaturvedi on the grounds that his appointment wasn’t approved by the CVC.

Following repatriation of Vishwas Mehta, who was holding charge as CVO, to his parent cadre, the ministry gave Manoj Jhalani, joint secretary, the additional charge from October 10 for three months. But the CVC was kept in the dark.

“A CVO can be appointed for three months without the CVC’s prior approval, but the ministry is yet to inform us about the appointment,” a senior CVC official told The Indian Express.

As per the CVC manual, “suitable arrangements in vacancies for three months… due to leave or other reasons” is permitted without the CVC’s prior approval, but “the nature and duration of the vacancy” and the name of the officer must be reported to the Commission.

A month after Jhalani’s appointment, the CVC website still lists Mehta as the CVO of the Health Ministry. In its communications to the ministry on October 21 and 22, the Commission continued to address Jhalani’s predecessor as CVO.

The Health Ministry did not follow the due process — of furnishing a panel of names in the order of preference, along with their bio-data and complete ACR dossiers for the Commission’s prior approval — though it knew well ahead that a new CVO would have to be appointed once Mehta, who was on a three-month extension, left for his parent cadre on October 9.

J P Nadda, who replaced Harsh Vardhan as Health Minister Sunday, had repeatedly sought the removal of AIIMS CVO Chaturvedi on the ground that his appointment was not approved by the CVC, prompting Vardhan to rustle up signatures of 20 Health Ministry officials in 24 working hours between August 13 and 14 to remove Chaturvedi

The CVC has since taken cognizance of Chaturvedi’s petition against his removal and on October 22 sought the ministry’s response at the earliest. The IFS officer has accused the ministry of concealing facts and alleged that Nadda committed forgeries to force his removal.

Health Secretary Lov Verma did not respond to queries.

Ousted AIIMS officer seeks CBI probe

CVC tells health ministry to respond

The Indian Express, 3 November, 2014

Taking cognizance of a plea by Indian Forest Service officer Sanjiv Chaturvedi, the Central Vigilance Commission (CVC) has sought comments from the health ministry on his removal from the post of the chief vigilance officer (CVO) of the All India Institute of Medical Sciences.

In August, Health Minister Harsh Vardhan ordered the removal of Chaturvedi as CVO after BJP MP J P Nadda demanded his ouster.

The row over his removal prompted Prime Minister Narendra Modi to seek a report from the  ministry. Harsh Vardhan justified Chaturvedi’s ouster saying the CVC had twice rejected the officer’s name for the post.

In his petition, Chaturvedi urged the CVC to refer back to the ministry the letter ordering his removal. Saying facts had been concealed, he sought a CBI probe into the matter. On October 22, the CVC wrote to the joint secretary and CVO of the ministry, seeking an early response.

In his three representations to the CVC — on August 26, September 15 and 19 — Chaturvedi claimed that Nadda’s June 24 letter to Harsh Vardhan not only sought his removal from the post of the AIIMS CVO but also proposed the name of his replacement, asked to put on hold all inquiries/disciplinary proceedings initiated by Chaturvedi, and even recommended that he be repatriated to his parent cadre Haryana.

The BJP MP was said to have followed up his letter by meeting the Health Minister. In a letter on August 14, the ministry conveyed to the CVC its decision to remove Chaturvedi, claiming that AIIMS was yet to convey the approval of its governing body (GB) and institute body (IB) for creation of a separate post of CVO.

In his representations, Chaturvedi alleged that the ministry concealed statutory approvals granted for creation of the post of the AIIMS CVO by the GB in November 2010 and by the IB in January 2012, and commitments made by the ministry to a parliamentary committee in June 2012 and January 2013.

Demanding a CBI probe under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, and sections of IPC related to forgery, Chaturvedi urged the CVC to protect him from what he called a witch hunt.

Behind land record files, 12 mines thrive in Sariska heart

The Indian Express, 1 November, 2014

The law prohibits mining activity in the Sariska tiger reserve but disagreement among departments over land revenue records have allowed 12 mines to continue in the core area of the reserve.

Mining and forest department records accessed by The Indian Express show that 12 marble mines are located in Khasra 166, near Palpur village, which was notified as part of the tiger reserve in 1975. It falls within the 881-sq km core critical area (CTH) declared in 2007.
A ground check confirmed that six of the 12 marble mines in Tilwad forest block under Tehla range of Sariska are currently operational while the rest await renewal of licences.

When The Indian Express checked the sites, blasting work was on and trucks were busy carrying away loads. Dumping of debris from the quarries have created artificial hillocks on forest land.

Nine mines have been operational since the 1980s, barring the 1992-1996 period when a Supreme Court order shut all mines in and around Sariska. Another three mines were permitted during 2001-05. These are “legal” mines because successive Sariska managements have ruled that Khasra 166 does not fall within the tiger reserve.

When The Indian Express checked with R S Shekhawat, Field Director of Sariska, he said: “How can there be mining inside the tiger reserve? I have to check the specifics of this area (Khasra 166). Mines could not have continued anywhere if the area was inside the Sariska core.”

Shekhawat’s argument has a history. In 2005, following a petition filed by the Alwar-based Bandhua Mukti Morcha, the then Field Director of Sariska wrote to the Supreme Court’s Central Empowered Committee (CEC) that Khasra 166,  where the mines were operational, was not the same Khasra 166 notified as part of the reserve.

Khasra numbers often change in land settlements over a period. And the Sariska management has maintained that the mines occupy Khasra 166 as per the 1957 land records while Khasra 166, notified as part of the tiger reserve according to the 1922 land records, is a different area.

But records submitted in 1992 by the Field Director of Sariska to a Supreme Court-appointed committee, tasked with  demarcation of the tiger reserve boundary, show that Khasras 1, 7, 165 and 166 of Palpur village were notified as tiger reserve as per the 1957 (Samvat 2014) land records.

Also, land records at the Rajgarh tehsil office state that Khasras 1 and 166 were identified as per the 1957, and not 1922, land records for transfer to the forest department. As per tehsil records, Khasra 166 was split and renumbered 285, 286, 290-293 and 293/417 in 1989.
The latest records with the Rajasthan mining department bear this out. The list for mines in Palpur shows that 12 mines occupy a total of 21.3 hectares in new Khasras 285, 286, 290-293 and 293/417 of 1989 – or Khasra 166 of 1957 – inside the tiger reserve.

The mining department also marked the quarries on the same map of Sariska submitted to the Supreme Court by the tiger reserve management in 1992. All 12 mines sit, either fully or in parts, on Khasra 166 on that map – the same area that the Sariska management does not acknowledge as part of the core.

Despite reminders since 2012 when Sariska’s buffer zone was notified, the National Tiger Conservation Authority (NTCA) is still to receive a map, demarcating the reserve boundaries on ground, from the Sariska authorities. As a result, the Tiger Conservation Plan (TCP) of the reserve is still to be finalised.

When his comments were sought, O P Meena, Additional Chief Secretary (Forests), Rajasthan, directed the queries to the mining department. “I think the boundary has been marked in Sariska. As far as mines are concerned, only the mining department can provide details,” he said.

But D S Maru, Director of Mines, said the reserve boundary had never been conclusively demarcated on the ground. “Only the revenue department can settle this issue by finalising the limits of the boundary. Mining is not allowed if an area falls within the tiger reserve,” he said.

Rajkumar Rinwa, named state minister for forest and mines earlier this week, told The Indian Express he would examine the locations of the mines in and around Sariska. “I am meeting the Chief Minister and will discuss the matter,” he said.