GHAZIABAD: The Ghaziabad Development Authority (GDA) has struggled to generate revenue from compounding fees during the fiscal year 2025-26, achieving only 50% of its target.
The compounding charge is an additional fee levied by the development authority for construction that exceeds the approved layout plan, provided the deviation does not exceed 10%.
According to documents obtained by TOI, GDA aimed to collect Rs 103 crore from compounding fees but only managed to gather Rs 52 crore across its eight zones.
The compounding charges are approximately Rs 482 per square meter for residential units and double that for commercial properties. For plotted areas up to 300 square meters, both side and rear setbacks are fully compoundable. For plots ranging from 301 to 2000 square meters, the front setback is 25% compoundable while the rear is 75%, and side setbacks are 25% compoundable.
Data from the monthly monitoring report by the state government and the UP Darpan Dashboard, which tracks the performance of various departments, reveals that GDA’s implementation of mutation policies in February was significantly lower than the average. As a result, Ghaziabad ranks among the top five underperforming districts in the state.
Records on the UP Darpan Dashboard show that GDA received 25,111 online mutation applications; of these, 19,179 were deemed valid. However, GDA only managed to process 97% of these applications. According to the evaluation system, a district scoring below 98.47% is assigned a zero rating.
Mutation refers to the change of ownership documented in local municipal revenue records, often occurring due to the death of the original owner or through inheritance.
The mutation charge is set at 1% of the property’s value, while in cases of ownership transfer due to death, the fee is Rs 5,000. GDA’s underperformance in both compounding and mutation metrics has raised concerns about its overall effectiveness.
A GDA official commented, “In February, our performance on the CM Dashboard concerning mutation parameters was poor due to workforce deployments in SIR. Concerning compounding fees, enforcement departments have been directed to take this matter more seriously.”
