Where the sources disagree

These are not errors on this site. They are differences between two government publications, both of them current, both cited below with a page. The dates are close but not identical, which explains part of the gap in the allotment lines and none of it in the lane count.

The lane count is the cleanest of the three, because it is a design specification that cannot drift with a reporting date. The monthly proforma has called the road a six lane greenfield expressway in all eight editions. The company's own annual report for the year ended 31 March 2025 describes it as 110 km and four lane, and the previous year's report called it six lane. The dataset records that disagreement as a caveat rather than picking a winner, and so does this page.

Three pairs that look unrelated are the same quantity in different units or different reporting systems. The reconciliation column is arithmetic performed by this register on dataset values, and it is labelled as such: the share price of INR 10 comes from the company's own note on authorised capital.

Total share capital in the audited balance sheet is 5 68 332.65 INR lakh, which is INR 5 683.33 crore, and that is the sum of the two shareholders above. The equity figure in the monthly proforma is therefore the central government half, not the whole of the company.

The company's own reports disagree with themselves in five places that the dataset records rather than resolves. They are quoted here in full, because a reader comparing this register with the original will meet them.

• The two reports disagree on the Ahmedabad-Dholera Expressway lane count: the FY2023-24 report calls it a 6-lane Greenfield Expressway (p19); the FY2024-25 report calls it '110 km, 4-lane' (p21). Both statements are recorded as written. Neither has been corrected or reconciled.
• The expressway completion target moved between reports: January 2025 (FY2023-24 report) to end of 2025 (FY2024-25 report). Both are stored, each tagged TARGET against its own source year.
• The FY2024-25 report restates two FY2023-24 comparatives under its Note 43 reclassification: employee benefit expenses 465.41 becomes 466.34 and other expenses 1,121.46 becomes 1,120.53. The dataset keeps the original figure from each report rather than picking a winner.
• Source-document inconsistency, left uncorrected: Note 44 (dicdl_ar25.pdf p111) lists land development cost sub-lines for FY2023-24 that differ from Note 10 (p86) for the same items (Roads & Services 1,88,346.61 vs 1,58,497.79), and its own FY2023-24 column does not sum to the total it prints. The dataset uses the Note 10 figures, which tie to the balance sheet and sum correctly. The variance is flagged, not silently resolved.
• The FY2024-25 board composition table (p30) prints names, designations and DINs as three parallel columns, and DIN 09403694 appears against Shri Ashokkumar Khandubhai Patel elsewhere in the same report. Director records for FY2024-25 carry a note that the DIN-to-name mapping on that table is not fully reliable. Names and designations are as printed.

The expressway completion target is the plainest of them: it reads January 2025 in the FY 2023-24 report and end of 2025 in the FY 2024-25 report. Both are held here against their own source year, and both are tagged TARGET, because a target is not a reading.