To,

The Mission Director,

PMAY (U)-Housing for All

Govt. of Andhra Pradesh

Subject: Revision of HFAPoA submitted by Govt. of Andhra Pradesh under PMAY (U)

Dear Sir,

The Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs (MoHUPA) is in receipt of 67 HFAPoAs as

required under Housing for All Mission. A detailed appraisal of all the HFAPoAs submitted
by Government of Andhra Pradesh has been done by the Ministry. The overall content of
the documents needs few basic information and analysis of data collected through demand
survey. The observations on HFAPoAs may be summarized as under, which needs to be
redressed:

1. Slum details are grossly missing such as slum-wise land ownership, no. of HHs,
tenability analysis with physical location of slum and social and physical
infrastructure.
2. Segregated data of the intended beneficiaries with respect to SC/ST, General, OBC,
and Minority under each vertical as per demand survey is not provided.
3. The Annexure 5 (I-V) of the guidelines needs to be filled properly. In Annexure 5-II
Slum-wise demand in each vertical (CLSS, AHP or BLC) for untenable slums should
be provided.
4. Technical and financial viability analysis of slums for In-situ redevelopment (ISSR) is
not carried out.
5. Clear strategy for improvement of all slums needs to be explained.
6. Details of kutcha/pucca houses and social categorization of the all beneficiaries is not
mentioned.
7. Evidence of stakeholder consultation and method of demand survey not provided.
8. With analysis of land required for AHP, attempt should also be made to identify the
land in consultation of appropriate authorities.
9. A detailed account of no. of houses constructed in last 5 years under various schemes
is required. Vacant houses should be mentioned, if any.
10. The data pertaining to slum on land ownership, tenability analysis needs to be duly
authenticated and vetted by respective ULBs.

Page 1 of 7
The detailed city/town-wise comments are also attached for your reference and further
action. We request you to kindly revise the HFAPoAs as per observations mentioned and
re-submit the documents for further action at the Ministry. It is also requested that all
Annexures 5 & 6 given in the scheme guidelines should be entered in PMAY-MIS after
necessary correction. It may be ensured that remaining HFAPoAs which are yet to be
submitted are revised accordingly. Further, the Utilization certificate of fund released for
HFAPoA may also be submitted. This may please be accorded priority.

Yours Sincerely

S. C. Jana

Deputy Secretary (HFA-3)

Page 2 of 7
Observation on HFAPOA submitted by Govt. of Andhra Pradesh

S. No. City Appraisal Comments

1. Nuzvid 1. Slum wise physical location detail is required to ascertain
Nandigama tenability.
Jaggaiahpet
Tadepalli 2. Financial viability analysis of tenable slums is not spelt in the
Manglagiri report.
Tiruvuru
Ongole 3. Housing condition details for all beneficiaries should be
provided.

(CIST-7) 4. Instead of simply giving details of past housing schemes

including private developers, how many houses were
constructed under those schemes and allotment, occupation
details is required. Vacant houses should be mentioned, if any
5. Annexure 5 (I-V) is not provided as per the guidelines.

6. AIP should be as per the format provided in the Guidelines

(Annexure 6).

7. With analysis of land required for AHP, attempt should also be

made to identify the land in consultation of appropriate
authorities.

8. Details of kutcha/pucca houses of the beneficiaries is

required.

9. Central share under CLSS is not calculated correctly. RS. 1.95

lakh could be taken as base figure for estimation.

10. Reforms and procedure has been explained for JNNURM

whereas mention of PMAY (U) is nowhere (Copy paste)

2. Tirupati 1. Slum wise land ownership, HHs, population and physical

location detail is required to ascertain tenability.
(Seedot-1)
2. Financial viability analysis of tenable slums is not spelt in the
report. Follow the guideline.

3. Housing condition details for all beneficiaries should be

provided.

4. A detailed account of no. of houses constructed in recent past

Page 3 of 7
 under various schemes is required. Vacant houses should be
mentioned, if any.

5. Annexure 5 (I-V) is not provided as per the guidelines.

6. AIP should be as per the format provided in the Guidelines

(Annexure 6). Mention of bank loan should fall under beneficiary
or state. Additional information may be part of the text.

7. With analysis of land required for AHP, attempt should also be

made to identify the land in consultation of appropriate
authorities.

8. Details of kutcha/pucca houses of the all beneficiaries is

required.

9. Central share under CLSS is not calculated correctly. Rs. 1.95

lakh could be taken as base figure for estimation.

10. Reforms and procedure has been explained for JNNURM

whereas mention of PMAY (U) is nowhere (Copy paste)

11. Number of slum does not conform to list provided.

3. Nandikotkur 1. Slum details are grossly missing.
Adoni
2. All above mentioned comments for Tirupathi is true for this
(Seedot-1) city also.

3. The report is full of theory whereas contextualization with the

city is missing.
4. Vijaywada 1. Slum details are grossly missing such as social and physical
infrastructure.
(NCEP-1)
2. Land ownership, HHs, Tenability analysis with physical
location of slum not provided.

3. Financial viability analysis of tenable slums not depicted.

4. Strategy for dealing with all slums is not explained.

5. Annexures 5 (I & II) is not provided.

6. Details of kutcha/pucca houses and social categorization of

the all beneficiaries is required.

7. Evidence of stakeholder consultation and method of demand

survey not provided.

8. With analysis of land required for AHP, attempt should also be

made to identify the land in consultation of appropriate

Page 4 of 7
 authorities.

9. A detailed account of no. of houses constructed in last 5 years

under various schemes is required. Vacant houses should be
mentioned, if any.

5. Salur 1. Slum details are grossly missing such as social and physical
Nellimarla infrastructure.
Bobbilli
Yalamanchili 2. Land ownership, HHs, Tenability analysis with physical
Vijiyanagram location of slum not provided.
Parvathipuram
3. Financial viability analysis of tenable slums not depicted.
(Panaromic
Technologies-6) 4. Strategy for dealing with all slums is not explained.

5. Annexures 5 (I - V) is not provided correctly.

6. Details of kutcha/pucca houses and social categorization of

the all beneficiaries is required.

7. Evidence of stakeholder consultation and method of demand

survey not provided.

8. With analysis of land required for AHP, attempt should also be

made to identify the land in consultation of appropriate
authorities.

9. A detailed account of no. of houses constructed in last 5 years

under various schemes is required. Vacant houses should be
mentioned, if any.

10. The report is full of theory whereas contextualization with

the city is missing. Format of report is provided with remark to
fill in the information but no data provided.
6. Addanki 1. Financial viability for ISSR has not been shown.
Macherla
Vinukonda 2. All slums are tenable and on private land is not possible as
Markapur mentioned. An authenticated list of slum with HHs, population,
Repalle tenability and ownership details from Municipality needs to be
Piduguralla attached in the report.
3. A detailed account of no. of houses constructed in last 5 years
under various schemes is required. Vacant houses should be
(ARSGS-6) mentioned, if any.

4. Details of kutcha/pucca houses and social categorization of

the all beneficiaries is required.

5. Evidence of stakeholder consultation and method of demand

survey not provided.

Page 5 of 7
 6. With analysis of land required for AHP, attempt should also be
made to identify the land in consultation of appropriate
authorities.

7. Srikakulam 1. Slum details are grossly missing such as social and physical
Palasa- infrastructure.
Kasibugga
Rajam 2. List of slum, land ownership, HHs, Tenability analysis with
Amadalavalasa physical location of slum not provided.
Ichapuram
Palakonda 3. Financial viability analysis of tenable slums not depicted.

(Bhaskar 4. Strategy for dealing with all slums is not explained.

Design-7)
5. Annexures 5 (I - V) is not provided correctly.

6. Details of kutcha/pucca houses and social categorization of

the all beneficiaries is required.

7. Evidence of stakeholder consultation and method of demand

survey not provided.

8. With analysis of land required for AHP, attempt should also be

made to identify the land in consultation of appropriate
authorities.

9. A detailed account of no. of houses constructed in last 5 years

under various schemes is required. Vacant houses should be
mentioned, if any.

10. The report is full of theory whereas contextualization with

the city is missing. Format of report is provided with remark to
fill in the information but no data provided.

11. The report is very sketchy in nature devoid of required

details. Preparation of report could be more professional.

12. Reforms and procedure has been explained for JNNURM

whereas mention of PMAY (U) is nowhere (Copy paste)
8. Remaining 1. Slum analysis is grossly missing such as slum-wise land
cities (VVN ownership, tenability analysis with physical location of slum
Technologies- and status social and physical infrastructure in most of the
38) reports.

2. Annexures 5 (I - V) is not provided correctly as per the

Page 6 of 7
guidelines.

3. Financial viability analysis of tenable slums not depicted.

4. Evidence of stakeholder consultation and method of demand

survey not provided.

5. With analysis of land required for AHP, attempt should also be

made to identify the land in consultation of appropriate
authorities.

6. A detailed account of no. of houses constructed in last 5 years

under various schemes is required. Vacant houses should be
mentioned, if any.

7. The report is full of theory whereas contextualization with the

city is missing. Format of report is provided with remark to fill in
the information but no data provided.

8. Reforms and procedure has been explained for JNNURM

whereas mention of PMAY (U) is nowhere.

Page 7 of 7