CAG Endorsed My Reporting – Gujarat Not the Best State

March 24, 2013

Dear Friends,

A-Z reported by me in months and years in advance are being Endorsed by CAG.

For example I was reporting for years Reliance with GSPC were Hoarding Oil & Gas Discoveries – conniving to Escalate Capitalization. Both discovered unexpectedly Huge Reserves in very first well – there were always suspicion – last year CAG reported RIL was drilling in ONGC and GSPC discovery areas – RIL had hired most powerful rigs that could extract all the Oil & Gas in ONGC and GSPC discoveries when actually basic rigs were required.

Gujarat provided Rs.6100 crores Tax Concessions to 87% Foreign Owned Company.

75% of Gujarat cultivates non Food Crops.

In this brief TOI reporting you can see for 80,000 kilometer Road Networks in Gujarat funds allocated were Rs.957 crores for Roads and Buildings – half was unspent – thus just around Rs.300 crores was spent on roads – this is not even Rs.40,000 per kilometer. Most of the projects we see on TV are Central – NHAI projects.

‘It has invested Rs 39,179 crore in corporations, boards, government companies, rural banks and joint ventures. In the last five years, the average return on this investment was 0.25% while the state government has paid interest at the rate of 7.75%.’ – CAG.

In 1999 I had petitioned to President of India that SSP shall fail completely due to OVER DESIGN. Pdf attached.

Unlike Maharashtra Gujarat has over 15 BCM of water available for Gujarat – 5 BCM per month but not a drop is flowing in drought hit Rivers and Canals.

He signs MOU worth $2 Trillion but not even $10b implemented. Most are Indian Projects and most are not viable without State Tax Breaks.

Modi cares for few Corporate – neglects 60 million Gujaratis.

Modi lacks Qualification to Understand Difference Between Good and Bad.

Other states are Bad because there nothing get implemented – but in Gujarat good projects are sabotaged to enrich few and Bad projects undertaken with speed.

Ravinder Singh

Inventor & Consultant

Progressindia008@yahoo.com

CAG picks holes in Narendra Modi’s Gujarat development plan

Mar 22, 2013

AHMEDABAD: At a time when NarendraModi’s development model is under national spotlight, the Comptroller and Auditor General (CAG) has criticized his government in Gujarat for imprudent fiscal management. It has underlined a need for greater professionalism and accountability in the functioning of the government and asked it to be more alert and responsive.

The national auditor has said the state government has incurred 41% higher debt than the previous fiscal and burdened the exchequer with heavy interest liability at a higher rate.

The state government had taken a loan of Rs 15,083 crore to adjust the monitory deficit of Rs 11,027 crore, leaving a balance of Rs 3,645 crore, which is poor debt management, said CAG.

It has invested Rs 39,179 crore in corporations, boards, government companies, rural banks and joint ventures. In the last five years, the average return on this investment was 0.25% while the state government has paid interest at the rate of 7.75%.

The CAG report, which is likely to be tabled in the ongoing session of the state assembly, also criticized the government for not furnishing utilization certificate of Rs 9,066.34 crore.

The CAG has also observed that compared to other states, Gujarat traditionally spends less on education and health. Though, in 2011, the amount spent on health was adequate.

It has also ridiculed the government on computer literacy and education — Rs 292 crore was allocated but only Rs 88.24 crore was used. Similarly, for special courts, Rs 629 crore was granted, but only Rs 252.45 crore was used.

In the roads and buildings department, Rs 957.95 crore was allocated for constructing offices, but not even half the amount was spent for various reasons. Sighting many such examples, CAG has observed that there is wide variation, practically under every major head of account.

Although the entire state government has been criticized, the finance and public sectors have been shown as least efficient. For example, savings under each major heads clearly suggest non-performance of government departments, for which no reasons have been given.