The Punjab Finance Department has raised strong objections to proposed amendments to the Land Pooling Policy of 2021 and the Oustee Policy of 2013, put forward by the Housing and Urban Development Department. It has sought detailed justification, financial assessment and clarity on several contentious issues before the proposals are placed in the Cabinet meeting.
Proposed Changes to Land Allotments
Under the proposed changes, the size of commercial SCO plots would increase from 200 to 210 square yards per acre, applicable to holdings of one acre and above. Residential allotments would rise from 1,600 to 1,630 square yards per acre. Similar enhancements are proposed under the oustee policy for landowners whose land is acquired for infrastructure projects.
Finance Department's Concerns
The Finance Department, in its note, pointed out that the Cabinet memorandum lacked specific rationale or objective criteria for these increases, citing only representations from farmers and landowners. It warned that the amendments would reduce saleable area available to development authorities such as GMADA, leading to potential revenue loss. No financial assessment of this impact was provided.
The Housing Department has also proposed extending enhanced benefits to ongoing schemes like Eco-City III and low/high density projects in New Chandigarh, giving the changes retrospective effect. The Finance Department has asked for an evaluation of financial, legal and administrative repercussions on these projects.
Stamp Duty Exemption and Revenue Impact
On the proposed exemption from stamp duty through the Sahuliyat Certificate mechanism, the Finance Department noted this would be an additional benefit beyond developed plots already provided. It sought an assessment of revenue foregone and clarified that any loss must be absorbed by the authority concerned without state budgetary support.
Ambiguity and Legal Issues
The note also flagged ambiguity regarding extension of oustee benefits under land pooling schemes, warning against duplication. On preferential location plots (PLPs), it cautioned against policy changes as the matter was sub judice in the Punjab and Haryana High Court.
