Which official Dholera source should I believe?
One is current, the other is audited
Every number on this site comes from one of two kinds of document, and they have opposite strengths. The government's monthly return is current but unaudited and full of holes. The company's annual report is audited and thorough but more than a year old. This page sets them side by side so you know which one to reach for, and what each of them cannot tell you.
Neither one is the answer on its own
There are exactly two kinds of document behind every figure on this site. One is fast, recent and unaudited. The other is slow, more than a year old, and signed off by a chartered accountant who can be held to it. People arguing about Dholera usually quote whichever of the two suits them, without saying which they used.
The honest position is that each is authoritative for different things. If you want to know how much land has been allotted this year, the monthly return is the only source that is current enough to help. If you want to know what the project actually costs, or who owns what, only the audited accounts can be relied on.
The two sources, side by side
| The monthly government return | The audited annual report | |
|---|---|---|
| What it is | A monthly progress return on every industrial corridor project, compiled for a unit inside the central government | The statutory annual report of the company that builds Dholera's first phase |
| Who writes it | NICDC and DPIIT, central government | Dholera Industrial City Development Limited |
| Is it audited | No | Yes, by M/s C.P Jain & Co., Chartered Accountants (FRN 116529W) |
| How often | Monthly, in principle | Once a year |
| How current | Latest edition here as on 30 June 2026 | Latest edition here for the year to 31 March 2025 |
| What it is good for | Land allotted, land available, plots taken, capacity running. Physical quantities. | Money, ownership, contracts, obligations. Anything that has to survive an auditor. |
| Where it is weak | No expenditure figure, no completion percentage, no road length, and months go missing | More than a year out of date by the time you read it |
| Documents held here | 9 | 2 |
| Figures taken from it | 115 | 225 |
Sources: the 9 Delivery Monitoring Unit and parliamentary documents and the 2 audited annual reports listed in full on the sources page.
When they contradict each other
They do contradict each other, and this site does not hide it or average it away. Where two official documents state different values for the same quantity, both are printed with their own date and page, and the reader decides. That is on the page where the sources disagree.
Everything the two of them between them refuse to publish is set out on the methodology page, and both datasets can be downloaded whole from the data page if you would rather check the extraction yourself than take this site's word for it.
Editorial rule of this site, applied to every page: two sources, both printed, neither blended.