Mumbai: In a report released by the Comptroller and Auditor General (CAG) of India, the Maharashtra Industrial Development Corporation (MIDC) is under fire for alleged financial irregularities, causing a loss of Rs 48.94 crore to the state exchequer.
The report, tabled in the Maharashtra assembly on Wednesday, highlights multiple instances of undue concessions and deviations from established policies.
A significant portion of the reported loss, approximately Rs 41.1 crore, was attributed to affiliates of Reliance Industries, raising eyebrows over the corporation's decision-making process.
The CAG report specifically points to the MIDC's granting of ineligible concessions in subletting charges, allowing five entities, including Reliance Corporate IT Park Limited, to benefit from apparent violations of prevailing policies.
The report questions the MIDC's decision to directly allot 15 industrial plots instead of opting for auctioning, a move that deviates from standard procedures. Additionally, it sheds light on the allocation of 103 plots despite their non-availability, raising concerns about transparency and adherence to regulations within the corporation.
The CAG report further underscores irregularities in the allocation of 28 industrial plots to 23 companies, citing deviations from the established bidding policy. It suggests that decisions were made that overrode the management's mandate, hinting at a lack of procedural adherence.
In response to the CAG's findings, the MIDC defended its actions, asserting that decisions were made on merit to encourage entrepreneurs. The corporation argued that certain companies experienced increased demand for their products, necessitating additional land for projects. Some decisions were reportedly linked to addressing emergencies arising from the Covid-19 pandemic.
Notably, the CAG report also raised concerns about the MIDC's relaxation of rules on a case-by-case basis, describing it as lacking transparency and introducing arbitrariness in decision-making. It criticized the direct allotment of plots to ineligible entities, deviation from bidding policies, and instances of undue concessions in revenue recovery.
The CAG emphasized that the MIDC failed to formulate a comprehensive program or plan to achieve the targets outlined in the State Industrial Policy. It also pointed out the absence of a perspective plan for land acquisition, development, and allotment activities, highlighting a lack of benchmarks to assess the corporation's performance.
Furthermore, the report revealed that the MIDC lacked a database or system to record details regarding actual employment generation and investments made by allottees. The corporation's role, according to the CAG, was confined to land development and allotment, with no mechanism in place to evaluate the impact on employment and investment.
As the controversy unfolds, questions arise about the governance and financial management practices within the MIDC.
The CAG's criticism underscores the need for increased transparency, adherence to established policies, and accountability in the functioning of key industrial development bodies, especially those responsible for significant economic activities in the region.