Punjab State Power Corporation’s fresh land transfer to PUDA raises concerns amid stalled projects

“When earlier projects of this scale are still stuck at the planning stage, it raises questions about the pace and outcomes of the latest land transfers,” a representative of the PSPCL employee federation said.

The broader decision to monetise government properties under OUVGL has invited sustained opposition from employee bodies, including the PSEB Engineers Association, which has long argued that large-scale monetisation of PSPCL’s land assets could compromise the corporation’s future power infrastructure requirements.

The issue has also attracted political attention, with Opposition parties questioning the long-term strategic implications of transferring such land to urban development agencies.

Fresh transfer of PSPCL land

Despite these concerns, PSPCL has now approved the transfer of 50 acres of vacant land in Badungar to PUDA under the OUVGL framework, following the 80:20 revenue-sharing formula between the two government entities. The value of the land is estimated to exceed ₹200 crore.

The decision was taken by the PSPCL Board of Directors in its 121st meeting held on January 28. After deliberations, the Board accorded formal approval for the transfer in line with OUVGL policy guidelines issued by the Department of Housing and Urban Development, Government of Punjab, in June 2013 and September 2014.

As per the approved resolution, PUDA will bear the entire actual expenditure required for shifting the existing 66 KV high-tension power lines, 11 KV low-tension (LT) lines, and transformers currently installed on the land proposed for transfer. PSPCL has further directed that the implementation of the Board’s decision be reported to the corporation within seven days, underscoring the emphasis on the timely execution of the transfer process.

Previous land transfer

The Badungar land transfer is the latest step taken by PSPCL under the OUVGL policy to monetise surplus land assets.

In November last year, the PSPCL Board approved the transfer of approximately 165.67 acres of land in Bathinda to PUDA, a decision that became public in December 2025. This land forms part of the residential colony of the Guru Nanak Dev Thermal Power Plant, which spans nearly 284 acres, with Blocks C and D identified as surplus.

Under the OUVGL policy, the Bathinda land transfer also followed the 80:20 revenue-sharing formula, with 80 per cent of the sale proceeds earmarked for PSPCL and 20 per cent retained by PUDA. PUDA was expected to develop the land for residential, commercial or mixed-use purposes and generate revenue through sale or lease.

The Board had also approved demolition of existing structures, subject to the condition that adequate sewerage, sanitation, and waste management facilities be ensured for residents occupying the remaining portions of the colony.

The Bathinda land issue dates back to the GNDTP’s shutdown on January 1, 2018. In June 2020, the then Congress government approved the transfer of 1,764 acres of the thermal plant’s land to PUDA for redevelopment, excluding around 280 acres of colony area. PUDA was authorised to raise ₹100 crore in loans, backed by a government guarantee, to initiate development.

However, subsequent disclosures revealed that the plan was significantly scaled back, with PUDA retaining only 253 acres, while the remainder was returned to PSPCL in January last year. The exercise has not yielded any revenue for PSPCL to date, as PUDA is still in the planning stage for developing an urban estate and a few other projects on this land.

Meanwhile, other state agencies have also moved to monetise surplus land. The Punjab Mandi Board recently transferred 12 acres of long-unused land in Mohali Phase 11 for the development of an ultra-modern fruits and vegetables market, a move confirmed by its chairman, Harchand Singh Barsat, in October 2025. Meanwhile, over 50 PSPCL properties in Ludhiana, Patiala, Bathinda, and other parts of the state are under the OUVGL list.

Employee federations, however, argue that unless past transfers translate into visible development and financial returns, the rationale for accelerating new land transfers under the OUVGL policy remains questionable.