How this is built, and where it stops

In practice every figure on this site is tagged OFFICIAL. Neither dataset holds a single reported or targeted value. For a subject where most numbers in circulation are projections, that is worth saying plainly rather than leaving for the reader to notice.

Nothing outside this table is calculated. Everything else was copied from a document, with the page recorded.

About the schemes

• AREA per scheme: no scheme document supplied states its own area. All six area figures come from one place, the 'TP TABLE' inset of Figure 10-2 in dp_report1.pdf p183, and the column header itself says '(APPROX.)'. Treat them as Development-Plan planning areas, not surveyed scheme areas.
• AREA for schemes 2/A and 4/A: null. Neither preliminary drawing states an area, and the DP report's TP TABLE has rows for 1-6 only, not for the /A sub-schemes.
• VILLAGES for schemes 2, 4, 5 and 6: null. No village list for these schemes appears in any supplied document.
• NOTIFICATION number and date for schemes 2, 2/A, 4, 4/A, 5 and 6: null. No notification for these was supplied.
• SCHEME NAME for schemes 2, 4, 5 and 6: null. They appear only as numbered entries in the DP report; no titled scheme document was supplied.
• STATUS for schemes 2, 4, 5 and 6: null. The DP report establishes that DSIR is divided into six TP schemes but states no statutory stage for any of them.
• Scheme 1 sanction: notif_dtps1.pdf is ONE gazette page (folio 323-1) that ends mid-sentence at 'Apex Authority (GIDB) hereby.' The operative sanction wording is on the missing continuation page, so this dataset does not claim scheme 1 was sanctioned. To close this gap, obtain gazette Extra No. 323 folio 323-2 onward.
• Scheme 1 deduction direction: no Schedule of modifications for scheme 1 was supplied, so it is unknown whether the 'average 50% deduction' direction issued for scheme 3 also applied to scheme 1.
• SCANNED / NO-TEXT-LAYER DOCUMENTS (flagged as instructed): notif_dtps1.pdf (1 page) and notif_dtps3.pdf (4 pages) are scanned images with zero extractable text. prelim_tps_2A.pdf and prelim_tps_4A.pdf have no text layer and no embedded fonts either - they are pure vector CAD drawings whose lettering was converted to curves. All four were read from high-resolution page renders, not from machine text extraction.
• gtpuda.pdf has an OCR text layer of poor quality that corrupts numerals in exactly the clauses that matter ('frfteen per cent', 'fre per cent'). Every statutory percentage in this dataset was re-read from a rendered page image. Any future re-extraction from that OCR text layer will produce wrong numbers.
• Current status as of 2026: this dataset reflects the supplied 2012-2013 documents only. Whether any of these schemes has since progressed to a final scheme under GTPUDA s.65/s.68, and whether further TP schemes or sub-schemes (2/B, 3/A, etc.) exist, cannot be determined from the supplied files.
• The relationship between scheme '2/A' and scheme '2', and between '4/A' and '4', is not stated in any supplied document and has been left unasserted.
• dp_report1.pdf has an internal inconsistency: the cover page reads 'FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN - DSIRDA' while every running header inside reads 'Draft Development Plan (DDP)'. Recorded here as-is, not resolved.
• No area, boundary coordinate, plot count, final-plot schedule or F-Form data was extractable from any supplied file. The scheme drawings themselves carry the note 'This plan should not be used for measurements.'

About the villages

• name_gujarati is null for all 22 villages. No source document available to this extraction carries Unicode Gujarati village names. The DSIRDA map, the 2009 gazette schedule, the TP scheme maps and the census sheet are all Latin-script only. The jantri PDFs embed Gujarati in a legacy non-Unicode font that extracts as mojibake, so nothing there could be read reliably. Gujarati names were NOT transliterated or guessed.
• The Dholera taluka village list could not be established. Dholera taluka postdates the 2011 Census (which has no Dholera sub-district under Ahmadabad district 474), and no post-2015 government taluka village directory is present in the source set. NICDC states the 22 SIR villages are "of Dholera Taluka" (nicdc_cleanroom.pdf p.8) but that is not an enumeration, and it does not exclude the taluka containing further villages. This list is emitted EMPTY on purpose.
• Part-village land shares are unknown. Every TP/DTPS scheme declares "PART VILLAGES", meaning only a portion of each village falls inside. No source gives the hectares or percentage of each village inside each scheme, so no village can be described as wholly inside the Activation Area.
• Draft TP Schemes 2, 4, 5 and 6 have no village list. Only dtps1.pdf and dtps3.pdf are present in the source set; the DSIRDA site nav lists DTPS No.1 to No.6 and preliminary schemes 1A1, 1A2, 2B1, 2B2, 2B3, 3A, 3B, 4B1, 5A, 5B, 6A, none of which were available. Village membership of those schemes is therefore unknown.
• notif_dtps1.pdf does not name the DTPS-1 villages. The captured gazette page (323-1) ends mid-sentence at "Apex Authority (GIDB) hereby." and the schedule page is not in the file. The four DTPS-1 part villages come from the dtps1.pdf map legend instead.
• The 2009 notified SIR area (879.3377 sq km) and the current DSIRDA/NICDC figure ("about 920 sq. kms") differ by roughly 41 sq km. No source document explains the difference and no boundary-variation notification was available, so it is flagged, not reconciled.
• The gazette area column sums to 879.3379 against a printed total of 879.3377, i.e. the 22 rows exceed the printed total by 0.0002 sq km. The discrepancy is in the source document itself. Every cell was re-read at 340-700 dpi and no misreading was found; the survey-number column, by contrast, sums exactly to the printed 14574.
• Village-level population, area and amenity data from the census sheet were not extracted; this dataset carries only codes, names and the SIR schedule figures.
• Census codes are Census of India 2011 codes. Village codes are re-issued between censuses, so these must not be presented as current LGD (Local Government Directory) codes. No LGD codes were available.

Things to be careful about in the village data

• Three different lists are emitted separately and MUST NOT be merged: the 2009 SIR notified area (22 villages), the Activation Area (4 part villages), and Dholera taluka (not established, empty).
• name_english uses the 2009 gazette spelling because that is the legal instrument. The DSIRDA map and the census spell three of them differently; all variants are carried in name_variants so any of the ten sites can match either spelling.
• All figures tagged OFFICIAL come from a government document. Nothing in this dataset is REPORTED or TARGET.
• The 2009 schedule is the notification as originally published. If the SIR boundary was later varied by a further notification, that document was not available and this dataset would not reflect it.

• It gives no price, no rate, no valuation and no forecast. Neither dataset contains price data, so none appears here and none is estimated.
• It does not advise you on buying, holding or selling. It is not a substitute for a title search, a revenue record or a lawyer.
• It ranks nothing by how good it is. The only orderings here are by area, by survey count and by serial number in the 2009 order, and each is labelled as ours.
• It fills no gap by inference. Four schemes have no village list on this site because none exists in our documents, not because nobody knows.
• It does not put law into its own words. A rule is quoted with its citation, or it is absent and the absence is stated.

If you find an error, write to corrections@dholera-estate.com and name the document and the page. A correction that names neither cannot be checked, and will not be made.