Siliguri, Dec. 30: Siliguri realtor Dilip Agarwal today broke his silence on the Sukna land scam and tried to give a clean chit to the army, saying that since the plot did not belong to the army, “the question of an ‘army land scam’ does not arise”.

Agarwal, who has been accused of “influencing” senior army officials to get a no-objection certificate to set up a school adjoining the army camp in Sukna, said today that the land on which the institution was to be set up “never belonged to the army”. So the controversy was “unnecessary”, he said in a press release.

However, in no report of The Telegraph had it been said the land belonged to the army. What had been reported is that Agarwal influenced senior army officials to get the NOC, which is necessary for security reasons as the plot is located near an army cantonment close to the international border.

Clarifying that there was “no room for any misunderstanding”, Agarwal said the land in question was leased out by the state government to four companies, including his, to promote tea tourism. However, as this would involve heavy flow of tourists, including those from abroad, the army had raised objections.

It was after this that the four companies negotiated with the government to change the terms of the lease so the land could be used for educational purposes.

Accordingly, a memorandum of understanding was signed between the army and the four companies. The new agreement mentioned that the land would be used for educational institutions.

Agarwal claimed that all the terms and conditions of the agreement were in the “army’s favour”. This included employment of dependants of army personnel, employment of ex-servicemen, reservation and 50 per cent concession in fees for children of army men and inclusion of army personnel in the school’s security committee.

“So where does the question of me doing any extra favour to or influencing army officials arise?” Agarwal said. “On pen and paper the agreement was weighed in favour of the army. It was to benefit the entire force.”

Trying to clear the controversy over the issue of the NOC by the army, Agarwal claimed the fact was that no NOC was required.

“Please note that the state government did not ask for any NOC from the army before leasing the land to us for tea tourism,” Agarwal said. “This, inter alia means that the NOC was not required for development of land near a military station.”

He said that since the land belonged to the state government, its opinion should also have been sought in the matter.

Agarwal, who is also the managing trustee of Geetanjali Educational Trust, which was supposed to set up the school in Sukna, refuted the charge that a senior position in the trust had been offered to an army official.

“The trust does not have any army official on its board and nor did it make any such promise,” Agarwal said.

He also wondered where the figure of Rs 295 crore as project cost had come from.

“No financial transaction, even for a single penny, has taken place,” he said. “So where does this figure come from? With whom was this amount transacted?”