AHMEDABAD: On October 28, 2024, the Sabarmati Riverfront Development Corporation Ltd. (SRFDCL) approved a bid to sell development rights for a 4,420 sq m plot near Vallabhsadan, located on the western side of the riverfront, for Rs 156.13 crore. Half of the total revenue from this sale will be allocated to the state government.
Sources indicate that in 2004, when the state-owned land along the banks of the Sabarmati was allocated for the riverfront development project by the revenue department, it was stipulated that 50% of total revenue from land sales should go to the government.
An anonymous official stated, “The state government provided land for the project under a revenue-sharing condition, and this will be enforced.”
On October 18, 2023, SRFDCL’s board ratified the Sabarmati Riverfront Land Disposable Policy 2023, which categorized the riverfront land into eight value zones for sale. However, the policy was revised in January 2024, reducing the saleable area of 1.49 lakh sq m into seven value zones.
Modeling after GIFT City, the base price and development rights for each value zone were established before the state government’s approval came through.
On September 13, 2024, SRFDCL published a Request for Proposal (RFP) to sell development rights for two riverfront plots—one near Vallabhsadan and the other adjacent to the Lemon Tree Hotel on the eastern side. The development rights for the 4,420 sq m plot near Vallabhsadan were set for 60,050 sq m of construction, with a base price of Rs 23,676 per sq m.
Two companies submitted bids, with a Mumbai-based firm making the highest offer of Rs 26,000 per sq m. Additionally, the development rights for 41,385 sq m on the 3,045 sq m plot near the Lemon Tree Hotel were also up for sale, but the auction was canceled due to a single bid.
SRFDCL sources confirmed, “The sale of 60,050 sq m of built-up development rights for the 4,420 sq m plot on the western side of the Sabarmati Riverfront was successfully conducted with the Mumbai company.”
“Discussions between the bidder’s representatives and SRFDCL officials led to modifications in the initial construction plan outlined in the RFP, which were deemed illegal and benefited the bidder company significantly, particularly in terms of public utilities.”
