Haryana grants sanction to prosecute Bhupinder Hooda in industrial plot allotment case
CBI to file chargesheet after sanction; ED had earlier named the former CM as 'central conspirator' and flagged alleged irregularities in 14 Panchkula plot allotments
The Haryana Government has granted sanction to prosecute Congress leader and former Chief Minister Bhupinder Singh Hooda in a CBI case involving the allotment of 14 industrial plots in the Industrial Area of Panchkula.
The allotments were made in 2013 when Hooda was serving as Chief Minister. The CBI had moved its request to the Haryana Government in February, while the FIR in the case was registered in 2016.
Along with Hooda, the state government has also approved prosecution of officials of the Haryana Urban Development Authority (HUDA), including former Chief Administrator DPS Nagal, former Chief Controller of Finance SC Kansal and former Deputy Superintendent BB Taneja.
In the case of Nagal, the competent authority is the Department of Personnel and Training (DoPT) for the sanction under the Prevention of Corruption Act. The request, routed through the Chief Secretary, has already been sent, sources confirmed.
Following the sanction, the CBI will file a chargesheet against Hooda, former government officials, and the allottees. The Enforcement Directorate (ED) had already filed a chargesheet against Hooda, officials, and the allottees in 2021.
ED case in the industrial plot allotment matter
Hooda has been named as the “central conspirator” in the ED’s prosecution complaint in the Panchkula industrial plot allotment case. The agency alleged that he “actually planned” the “illegal allocation” and altered the eligibility criteria to suit selected allottees.
Linking the accused allottees to Hooda, the ED stated that Renu Hooda and Nandita Hooda were from his ancestral village Sanghi; Kanwar Preet Singh Sandhu was the son of his schoolmate DD Sandhu; Mona Beri was the daughter-in-law of his OSD Baldev Raj Beri; Dr Ganesh Dutt Rattan used to play tennis with him; and Pardeep Kumar was the son of his private secretary Singh Ram.
The ED further claimed that allottee Ashok Verma’s father-in-law, Ashok Kaka, was chairman of HAFED during the Congress regime and known to Hooda.
Aman Gupta’s father, Ramesh Gupta, was a former Thanesar MLA and well acquainted with him. Lt Col OP Dahiya (retd) is related to former Congress MLA Karan Dalal. Dagar Katyal’s father, Sunil Katyal, had served as Commissioner in the Haryana Right to Service Commission and was known to Hooda. Manjot Kaur is the daughter-in-law of Justice MS Sullar (retd), who was also known to him. Siddharth Bhardwaj’s father, Sanjeev Bhardwaj, was HPCC secretary in 2004, left the party in 2005, and rejoined in 2016.
After the Punjab and Haryana High Court quashed allotments in the 2008 Bhiwani industrial plot case, a committee of secretaries formulated a selection criterion. The ED alleged that Hooda, as chairman of Haryana Urban Development Authority (HUDA), dropped the criteria of ‘experience’ and ‘qualification’, reduced marks for ‘financial capability’ from 25 to 10, and increased marks for ‘viva voce’ from 15 to 25.
The agency claimed Hooda did not approve the final criteria until after the industrial plots were advertised and all applications were in HUDA office's possession. He approved the criteria on January 24, 2012, whereas the last date for applications was January 6, 2012.
According to the ED, the revised criteria benefited the 14 allottees, who were “financially weak” and had “very less” or no experience, while an increase in marks in viva-voce provided “enough discretion” to interviewing members to extend favours.
The agency stated that most allottees were still less deserving than the unsuccessful applicants. There were 582 applicants for the 14 plots.
On pricing, the ED found that the plots were offered at Rs 6,400 per square metre, while the circle rate and market price were significantly higher. The agency found that plots worth Rs 30.34 crore were sold for Rs 7.85 crore, resulting in a substantial loss to the exchequer.
The ED, in its prosecution complaint filed on February 15, also termed the interview process a sham, alleging that non-allottees were called in the interview room “en bloc, i.e., in groups” and in some of the cases “non-inquiries were made or no questions were asked”.
The agency stated that the then Chief Administrator of HUDA, DPS Nagal—chairman of the interview committee and named as a key conspirator—allegedly gave the marks, while signatures of committee members were obtained on agenda sheets containing the marks six months after the interviews.
The ED further pointed out incomplete allottee forms, noting that Sandhu’s application form was unsigned and lacked a photograph. It also claimed that Nandita Hooda’s accountant appeared for the interview on her behalf, but she scored 22 out of 25 in viva voce.
Manjot Kaur, who stated her firm planned to install a flour mill, had no documentary evidence supporting her claim, yet was awarded 13 out of 15 in product capability and 21 out of 25 in viva, the ED said. It added that Pardeep Kumar and Dagar Katyal had applied under the category of unemployed engineering graduates but did not attach their degrees.
