A law firm, a consulting company, and a government relations practice are all searching for office space in Delhi. All three have similar headcounts. All three have similar budgets. All three are looking in the same general geography — Central Delhi.
The law firm is quoted ₹320 per sq ft per month for a floor near Connaught Place. The consulting company finds a comparable building in Aerocity for ₹180 per sq ft. The government relations practice is looking at Bhikaji Cama Place and sees ₹250 per sq ft.
The differences in these numbers are not random. They are a direct function of proximity to government — to the ministries, the regulatory bodies, the courts, the tribunals, and the procurement authorities whose daily decisions drive demand for the services that law firms, consulting companies, and government relations practices provide.
Government office clusters are one of the most consistent and underanalysed drivers of commercial rent variation in Delhi NCR — and in every Indian city with a significant government presence. They create a zone of elevated demand around themselves that persists through market cycles, drives premium rents in specific corridors, and penalises service firms that locate without understanding the mechanism.
Understanding this mechanism does not just help service firms explain why certain locations cost what they cost. It helps them make smarter location decisions — choosing between proximity premium and cost efficiency based on what their specific client interaction model actually requires, rather than defaulting to the prestigious address without testing whether the premium is justified.
This article provides a complete, practical guide to how government office clusters affect commercial rents in Delhi NCR — and what service firms should do with that understanding.
1. The Mechanism — Why Government Clusters Drive Commercial Rent Premiums
The relationship between government office clusters and commercial rents is driven by a specific and well-understood economic mechanism: proximity creates value for service providers whose work requires frequent, reliable, low-friction access to government decision-makers.
The three demand drivers that government clusters create:
Proximity value for frequent visitors: A lawyer who appears before the Delhi High Court on five matters per week cannot afford to be based 45 minutes away from the court complex. The round-trip time cost — multiplied by the number of appearances per year — makes a location near Sansad Marg or ITO a genuine operational necessity, not a status preference. The rent premium for these locations reflects the productive time that proximity saves.
Client-following location logic: Service firms follow their clients. A consulting firm whose primary clients are government ministries in North Block and South Block will locate near those ministries — because doing otherwise means senior partners spending their day commuting to and from client offices rather than serving clients. The concentration of government offices in Lutyens’ Delhi, the CGO Complex, and the Krishi Bhavan area creates a client-following demand that sustains premium rents in adjacent commercial corridors.
Ecosystem clustering: Once a critical mass of service firms — law firms, consultancies, government relations practices, regulatory advisors — locates near a government cluster, additional firms follow not just to access the government but to access the ecosystem. Peer proximity enables knowledge sharing, talent mobility, and the informal intelligence networks that service firms depend on. This self-reinforcing clustering dynamic is why Connaught Place, Barakhamba Road, and the Parliament Street corridor have maintained premium commercial positions for decades despite the availability of comparable buildings at lower rents in other parts of Delhi.
2. The Delhi NCR Government Cluster Map — Where the Premiums Are and Why
Delhi NCR has five distinct government office clusters, each of which creates its own commercial rent premium zone. Understanding which cluster affects which service category — and by how much — is the practical starting point for any service firm location analysis.
Cluster 1 — Lutyens’ Delhi and the Parliamentary Zone:
Coverage: North Block, South Block, Raisina Hill, Parliament House, Vigyan Bhavan, Krishi Bhavan, Shastri Bhavan, Nirman Bhavan
This is the most powerful government concentration in India — the PMO, the Finance Ministry, the Home Ministry, the Agriculture Ministry, the Cabinet Secretariat, and the key legislative infrastructure of the national government, all within a 2-kilometre radius.
Commercial rent premium: The highest in Delhi — ₹400 to ₹900 per sq ft per month for premium addresses in the immediate adjacency zone (Khan Market, Connaught Place, Barakhamba Road, Parliament Street). The premium over comparable buildings in Gurugram or Noida is 70 to 120 percent.
Who pays this premium: Law firms with Supreme Court and High Court practices. Management consulting firms with central government ministry mandates. Government relations and public affairs practices. Investment banks advising on government-linked transactions. International organisations with MOU relationships with Central Government.
Why the premium is sustained: The government offices themselves are immovable — their location has been fixed for a century and will not change. The service firm demand they create is therefore permanently anchored to this geography, creating a rent floor that has never softened below a significant premium even in down cycles.
Cluster 2 — CGO Complex and South Avenue Zone:
Coverage: CGO Complex Lodhi Road, various Ministry annexes in the Lodhi Estate, Sports Authority, NIA offices
The CGO Complex — a large government office campus off Lodhi Road — concentrates regulatory bodies and ministry annexes that attract a specific layer of service firm demand: compliance consultants, sector-specific regulatory advisors, and professional services firms serving public sector undertakings.
Commercial rent premium: ₹200 to ₹350 per sq ft in adjacent commercial pockets (Jangpura Extension, Bhogal, and the commercial strips along Mathura Road). Lower than the parliamentary zone but sustained by consistent demand from PSU-facing service firms.
Cluster 3 — Bhikaji Cama Place and the South Delhi Ministry Zone:
Coverage: Bhikaji Cama Place commercial complex, R.K. Puram government housing, various ministry department offices
Bhikaji Cama Place has historically been Delhi’s second major commercial hub for government-adjacent service firms — with proximity to several ministry department offices, the NDMC area, and the broader South Delhi government residential zone that houses senior civil servants whose professional networks are relevant to service firm business development.
Commercial rent premium: ₹200 to ₹280 per sq ft per month. The premium here reflects a combination of proximity to government offices and the general South Delhi commercial desirability.
Cluster 4 — ITO and IP Estate:
Coverage: Delhi High Court, numerous tribunals (DRAT, SAT, TDSAT), Income Tax Office complex, Railway Board, various Central Government departments in the IP Estate area
ITO is the court and tribunal hub of Delhi — and commercial rents in its immediate adjacency reflect the extraordinary demand this creates from law firms, tax consultants, and regulatory advisory practices.
Commercial rent premium: ₹180 to ₹280 per sq ft per month in adjacent commercial spaces. The absolute rent is lower than CP because building quality is lower — but the premium over non-government-adjacent buildings of comparable quality in Delhi is significant.
Who pays this premium: Tax advisory firms. Corporate law firms with Delhi High Court practice. Regulatory litigation specialists. Recovery and insolvency practitioners active before DRATs and tribunals.
Cluster 5 — Sector 34–38 Noida and the Regulatory Body Belt:
Coverage: SEBI Northern Regional Office, IRDAI, various Central Government undertaking offices, Noida Authority
The eastern periphery of the government cluster effect extends into Noida’s established commercial sectors — where several regulatory body offices have located, creating a lower-intensity but real premium for compliance and regulatory advisory firms that interact with these bodies.
Commercial rent premium: ₹100 to ₹160 per sq ft per month — significantly lower than Central Delhi in absolute terms, but still carrying a 15 to 25 percent premium over comparable Noida buildings in non-regulatory corridors.
3. The Rent Premium Gradient — How Distance from Government Affects the Price
The rent premium created by a government cluster is not binary — it does not apply within 500 metres and disappear at 501 metres. It follows a gradient — strongest in immediate adjacency, declining with distance, and eventually converging with the general market rate as accessibility by public transport creates a broader but thinner premium zone.
The concentric premium zones around a major government cluster:
| Zone | Distance from cluster | Rent premium over non-government buildings | Access mechanism |
| Prime adjacency | 0–500 metres | 60–120% premium | Walking distance — maximum time efficiency |
| Near adjacency | 500m–1.5 km | 30–60% premium | Short walk or quick cab — still practical for frequent visits |
| Metro-connected secondary | 1.5–4 km with direct Metro | 15–30% premium | Metro journey — 10–20 minutes |
| Metro-connected tertiary | 4–8 km with Metro | 5–15% premium | Metro journey — 20–35 minutes |
| Market rate zone | Beyond effective Metro reach | No government premium | Not practically accessible for frequent visits |
The practical implication:
A law firm that has one Supreme Court appearance per month does not need to be in the prime adjacency zone — the ₹400 per sq ft rent premium buys time savings that are not needed at that visit frequency. A Metro-connected location at ₹180 per sq ft — with a 25-minute journey to the court — makes more economic sense.
A law firm with five High Court appearances per week does benefit from prime adjacency — because the time cost of five round-trip Metro journeys per week over a year is substantial, and the premium may be justified by the productive hours recovered.
The question for every service firm is not “should I be near the government cluster?” but “how frequently does my client interaction model require physical proximity, and does the frequency justify the premium I would pay for it?”
4. The Service Firm Categories — Who Needs Proximity and Who Does Not
Different service firm categories have different proximity requirements — driven by how their work is actually done and how frequently it requires physical presence in government offices.
Category 1 — High proximity dependency:
Law firms with court and tribunal practice: Appearances before the Supreme Court, Delhi High Court, NCLAT, TDSAT, and the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal require physical presence at defined times. A lawyer who is late to a bench hearing because of a traffic delay has failed their client. For firms with active court practices, proximity to the court complex is an operational necessity — not a status statement.
Government relations and public affairs practices: The nature of this work requires frequent, informal, relationship-based interactions with civil servants, ministers’ offices, and regulatory body officials. These interactions are often spontaneous and time-sensitive — a meeting at North Block that becomes available at two hours’ notice requires a firm that can reach it quickly. Proximity is not just convenience — it is the operational model.
Regulatory advisory firms with daily regulatory interaction: Firms that appear before SEBI, IRDAI, RBI, CCI, or TRAI for their clients on a regular basis — filing responses, attending hearings, briefing regulatory staff — benefit from proximity to the relevant regulatory body’s office in proportion to their interaction frequency.
Category 2 — Moderate proximity benefit:
Management and strategy consulting: Consulting firms serving government ministries benefit from proximity — but the nature of consulting engagements (project-based, often multi-week on-site) means the team travels to the client rather than the client coming to the firm. Proximity reduces the overhead of project travel but is not operationally essential in the way court proximity is for litigators.
Tax advisory and compliance: Firms with significant government assessment work — handling income tax scrutiny, GST audits, customs hearings — benefit from proximity to the relevant tax authority offices during intensive hearing periods. But outside these periods, proximity is less operationally relevant.
Investment banking and financial advisory: Firms advising on government-linked transactions — privatisations, PPP structures, sovereign fund investments — benefit from proximity to the Ministry of Finance and related bodies during active deal periods. But the infrequency of individual transactions reduces the operational dependency on permanent proximity.
Category 3 — Low proximity requirement:
Technology and IT services firms serving government: The actual delivery of technology services to government departments typically happens at the government’s premises — the service firm’s office is where project management and back-office work occurs. Physical proximity to the government office is less important than proximity to the talent pool that delivers the work.
Staffing and HR services firms serving government: Government staffing engagements are managed largely through document exchange and occasional meetings. The government contracting office’s proximity is relevant for contract signing and submission meetings — not for daily operations.
Training and capacity building firms: Training firms whose clients include government departments typically deliver training at the government’s venue — not the training firm’s office. Proximity to the government office has limited operational relevance.
5. The Rent Premium vs Accessibility Trade-Off — The Calculation Service Firms Should Make
Rather than making a location decision based on instinct or precedent (“we should be near the government — we serve government clients”), service firms should make a quantified trade-off calculation that weighs the cost of the premium against the value of the proximity.
The calculation framework:
Step 1 — Count the required government visits per month:
How many times per month does the firm’s work require a senior professional to physically attend a government office — for hearings, meetings, filings, or interactions that cannot be conducted remotely?
Example: A law firm with 3 partners each averaging 8 High Court appearances per month = 24 required visits per month.
Step 2 — Calculate the time cost of the non-proximate option:
If the firm were in a Metro-connected location 25 minutes from the court, what is the time cost per visit, and what is the annual productive time lost?
24 visits × 50 minutes round trip (25 each way) = 1,200 minutes per month = 20 hours per month = 240 hours per year.
At a billing rate of ₹5,000 per hour for partner time: 240 hours × ₹5,000 = ₹12 lakh per year in billable time foregone due to travel.
Step 3 — Calculate the rent premium for the proximate option:
A 3,000 sq ft office in prime adjacency at ₹350 per sq ft versus a Metro-connected equivalent at ₹200 per sq ft:
Monthly rent premium: ₹350 – ₹200 = ₹150 × 3,000 sq ft = ₹4.5 lakh per month = ₹54 lakh per year.
Step 4 — Compare:
The firm is considering paying ₹54 lakh per year in additional rent to recover ₹12 lakh per year in partner time.
The proximate location is not justified by the time savings. The firm should locate in the Metro-connected secondary zone — paying the lower rent and accepting the additional travel time, which at this visit frequency has a lower cost than the rent premium.
If the same calculation is run for a firm with 15 appearances per partner per month (45 total):
45 visits × 50 minutes = 2,250 minutes per month = 37.5 hours per month = 450 hours per year.
450 hours × ₹5,000 = ₹22.5 lakh per year in billable time — still below the ₹54 lakh rent premium.
For this firm, at a billing rate of ₹5,000 per hour, no frequency of High Court appearances justifies paying a ₹54 lakh annual rent premium — the break-even billing rate at 450 partner hours is ₹12,000 per hour.
The calculation shifts significantly at higher partner billing rates — a firm where partner time is worth ₹15,000 per hour reaches break-even at approximately 240 partner visit hours per year. For very high-value, high-frequency litigation practices, the premium adjacency can be justified.
6. The Impact of Remote Work and Digital Government Processes — Has the Premium Changed?
The post-2020 acceleration of remote work and digital government processes has prompted many service firms to question whether the government proximity premium is as justified today as it was five years ago.
Where digitisation has reduced the premium:
Document filing and correspondence: The MCA21 portal, GST portal, RERA portals, and similar digital filing systems have eliminated the need for physical document submission for many regulatory processes. A compliance firm that previously needed proximity to a regulatory body’s office for weekly document submissions may now conduct those submissions entirely online — reducing the operational dependency on physical proximity.
Video conferencing for non-hearing interactions: Pre-hearing discussions, advisory meetings with regulatory staff, and informal briefings that once required a trip to a government office now frequently occur over video call — reducing the frequency of required physical visits.
Where proximity remains essential:
Hearings and formal proceedings: Courts, tribunals, and formal regulatory hearings cannot be conducted remotely in most cases — physical attendance remains mandatory. The proximity value for firms with active hearing practices is therefore unchanged.
Informal access and relationship management: The most valuable interactions in government relations work — casual corridor meetings, informal discussions before or after formal meetings, the visible presence that signals ongoing engagement — cannot be replicated digitally. For firms whose competitive advantage depends on these interactions, proximity remains operationally essential.
Physical document inspection and registry work: Some legal work requires physical presence at courts and registries for document inspection, court filing, and certification — not reducible to digital processes.
The net assessment:
For most service firm categories, digitisation has reduced but not eliminated the proximity requirement. The optimal location has shifted somewhat outward from prime adjacency toward the Metro-connected secondary zone — where the 20 to 25 minute journey to the government cluster is manageable for the reduced frequency of required visits.
The prime adjacency premium has moderated slightly as a result — but has not collapsed, because the remaining required visit frequency is still high enough for active litigation and government relations practices to value proximity significantly.
7. Sector-Specific Analysis — Which Regulatory Bodies Drive Which Commercial Corridors
Beyond the broad government cluster effect, specific regulatory bodies create localised commercial rent premiums in the corridors adjacent to their offices. Understanding these micro-premiums helps service firms in regulated industries make more granular location decisions.
SEBI — Securities and Exchange Board of India:
Primary Delhi NCR office: BKC Mumbai (headquarters), but northern regional office in Noida Sector 19
The northern regional office creates modest local demand from securities law firms and investment advisors active before SEBI in Delhi NCR. The premium is visible in Noida’s Sector 18 and 19 commercial strips — but modest compared to the major court-adjacent corridors.
Income Tax Department — Delhi Region:
Major presence: ITO complex, Aayakar Bhavan (Connaught Place), various assessment offices across Delhi
The concentration of income tax assessment offices in Central Delhi sustains significant demand from tax advisory firms — particularly during assessment and appeal seasons. The ITO area commercial strip carries a consistent premium of 25 to 40 percent over comparable buildings further from the tax office cluster.
Delhi High Court and associated tribunals:
Location: Sher Shah Road, adjacent to ITO
The most significant single-location driver of commercial rent premium in Delhi’s legal services corridor. Law firms with active Delhi High Court practice pay 40 to 70 percent premiums over comparable buildings in non-court-adjacent locations. The tribunal cluster nearby (DRAT, TDSAT, COMPAT, various CGIT benches) amplifies this effect.
Competition Commission of India (CCI):
Location: Hindustan Times House, Kasturba Gandhi Marg, Connaught Place
CCI’s Connaught Place location contributes to demand from competition law practices in the broader CP commercial corridor — though the CCI alone is not the primary driver of CP’s premium, which reflects the full range of government adjacency.
National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) — Delhi Bench:
Location: Shivaji Stadium Metro Station area
The NCLT creates concentrated demand from insolvency practitioners, corporate restructuring advisors, and corporate law firms with NCLT-heavy practices. The commercial strip between Connaught Place and the NCLT location benefits from this demand.
8. The Practical Location Decision — A Framework for Service Firms
Given everything above, how should a service firm actually make its location decision in Delhi NCR? The following framework converts the analysis into a practical decision sequence.
Step 1 — Define the client interaction model:
What proportion of the firm’s client interactions require physical presence at a government location? What is the average weekly government visit frequency for a senior professional?
- High (10+ visits per week per senior professional): Prime adjacency zone likely justified — run the rent vs time calculation to confirm
- Medium (3–9 visits per week): Metro-connected secondary zone — 20 to 25 minutes from the government cluster — is likely optimal
- Low (fewer than 3 visits per week): No compelling proximity requirement — location decision should be driven primarily by talent access, total cost, and client relationship management
Step 2 — Run the rent vs time calculation:
As detailed in Section 5 — calculate the annual rent premium of the proximate option versus the annual productive time cost of the non-proximate option, at the firm’s actual billing rates.
This calculation frequently reveals that the proximate option is not economically justified — even for firms that default to it based on convention or prestige.
Step 3 — Assess the ecosystem value:
Beyond the pure commute time calculation, is there a peer proximity value that justifies the premium? For law firms — where informal intelligence sharing, joint counsel mandates, and talent mobility between firms are significant business drivers — being in the same building corridor as other law firms has real value beyond Metro access to the court.
For consulting firms or technology service firms — where the peer ecosystem is less relevant to business development — this ecosystem premium carries less weight.
Step 4 — Calculate total occupancy cost per client-serving hour:
Divide the total monthly occupancy cost (rent + CAM + GST + all other charges) by the number of client-serving hours generated from that office per month. This metric — cost per client-serving hour — normalises the comparison across options with different rent levels and different time efficiency characteristics.
A ₹4 lakh per month office that enables 200 client-serving hours per month has a cost of ₹2,000 per hour. A ₹9 lakh per month prime adjacency office that enables 280 client-serving hours per month (because proximity saves 80 hours of travel) has a cost of ₹3,214 per hour. The cheaper office is more efficient per client-serving hour in this example — despite the time savings.
Step 5 — Consider phased location strategy:
Some service firms benefit from a two-location model — a smaller, expensive proximate office for client-facing and court/hearing activities, and a larger, less expensive back office for research, preparation, and administrative work.
This model decouples the premium adjacency from the full headcount — paying the premium only for the space that genuinely requires it, and housing the majority of the team in a more cost-efficient location.
A 40-person law firm might maintain:
- A 500 sq ft proximate office near the court complex — for partner appearances, client meetings, and court-adjacent work — at ₹350 per sq ft = ₹1.75 lakh per month
- A 4,000 sq ft secondary office in a Metro-connected location — for associates, research, and back-office — at ₹120 per sq ft = ₹4.8 lakh per month
- Total: ₹6.55 lakh per month
Versus a single 4,500 sq ft prime adjacency office at ₹350 per sq ft = ₹15.75 lakh per month.
The split model saves ₹9.2 lakh per month — ₹1.1 crore per year — while maintaining the proximate presence that the court practice requires.
9. Building Quality in Government-Adjacent Corridors — The Premium May Not Buy Grade A
A service firm that decides to pay the government proximity premium should understand one additional complication: the buildings in prime government-adjacent corridors are often not Grade A.
The land around Connaught Place, ITO, and Bhikaji Cama Place was largely developed in the 1970s, 1980s, and 1990s — before Delhi NCR’s Grade A commercial building era. Many of the buildings in these corridors are older, lower-specification structures — without centralised HVAC, without 100% power backup, with smaller floor plates, inadequate parking, and dated common area aesthetics.
A service firm paying ₹320 per sq ft per month near CP may be getting a building that would rent for ₹80 to ₹100 per sq ft in Okhla or Noida — with the premium entirely attributable to location, not to building quality.
The implications:
- Infrastructure adequacy must be verified separately from location evaluation — an old building in CP with insufficient electrical load or no DG backup is not suitable for most service firm operations despite its premium address
- Fit-out costs are often higher in older buildings — the base condition is worse, the ceiling heights may be low, and the MEP (mechanical, electrical, plumbing) infrastructure may need significant upgrading
- The total occupancy cost of an older premium-location building often exceeds that of a newer, better-specified building in a less prestigious but functionally superior location — once fit-out, upgrade costs, and operational inefficiencies are factored in
The correct comparison is always total occupancy cost per usable seat per month — not rent per sq ft per month.
10. The Future of Government Proximity Premium in Delhi NCR
The government proximity premium in Delhi NCR is structurally durable — but not static. Several developments are affecting its evolution.
New Delhi Municipal Council redevelopment:
The Central Vista redevelopment project — which will consolidate several ministries into new campus buildings along the Central Vista — will shift some ministry adjacency dynamics when it completes. The specific commercial corridors that gain and lose adjacency premium as a result are worth monitoring for service firms making long-term location commitments.
Metro network expansion and the flattening of the gradient:
Each extension of Delhi Metro brings previously distant commercial corridors closer — in time if not in distance — to the government cluster. The Phase IV expansion of the Metro will extend connectivity to areas currently in the low-premium tertiary zone, potentially bringing them into the 15 to 25 minute secondary zone. For service firms with moderate proximity requirements, these corridors offer increasing value as Metro connectivity improves.
Digital government and the evolving visit pattern:
As noted above, the continued digitisation of government processes is gradually reducing required visit frequency for some service firm categories — shifting the optimal location outward from prime adjacency toward the Metro-connected secondary zone for a wider range of firms. This trend is gradual but consistent — and service firms signing five-year leases today should factor it into their proximity requirement assessment.
The emergence of Aerocity as a secondary government-adjacent cluster:
Aerocity’s proximity to several newly established government and regulatory offices — and its excellent Metro connectivity to Central Delhi — is creating a new secondary government-adjacent corridor that did not exist five years ago. For service firms whose client mix includes both government and private sector clients, Aerocity’s connectivity to both the Central Delhi government cluster and to the private sector commercial activity around Aerocity itself offers a hybrid location value that is increasingly competitive.
11. What Commercial Brokers Must Know to Advise Service Firms Properly
A commercial broker advising a law firm, consulting company, or regulatory advisory practice on a location decision in Delhi NCR must understand the government proximity premium mechanism well enough to advise rather than just show.
The questions a well-prepared broker asks a service firm client:
- “How frequently do your senior professionals physically attend government offices — courts, ministries, regulatory bodies? Per week, not per year.”
- “What are the specific government locations you visit most often — and what is the current journey time from the buildings you are considering?”
- “At your billing rates, what is the annual productive time cost of an additional 20 minutes per government visit at your current visit frequency?”
- “Is there a peer ecosystem benefit to being in the same corridor as comparable firms — and how does that affect your business development model?”
- “Have you considered a two-location model — proximate presence for court/hearing work, larger secondary office for back-office and research?”
The analysis a well-prepared broker provides:
- A commute time comparison from each shortlisted building to the primary government offices the client visits — not estimated, physically tested
- A total occupancy cost comparison across shortlisted options — including all components, not just base rent
- A rent vs time calculation specific to the client’s visit frequency and billing rates
- An honest assessment of building quality in each corridor — flagging older buildings where the proximity premium is paying for location rather than specification
The broker who provides this level of analysis to a service firm client is not just finding available space. They are helping the firm make a multi-year cost decision with full information — and the value of that decision quality, compounded over a five-year lease, is orders of magnitude larger than the transaction value of the lease itself.
A Quick Reference — Government Clusters and Rent Premium Ranges in Delhi NCR
| Government cluster | Primary service firms attracted | Approximate rent premium over non-adjacent equivalent | Key adjacency corridors |
| Lutyens’ Delhi / Parliamentary Zone | Central government advisory, Supreme Court law firms, investment banking | 70–120% | Connaught Place, Barakhamba Road, Parliament Street, Khan Market |
| ITO / Delhi High Court | Litigation law firms, tax advisory, insolvency practitioners | 40–70% | ITO commercial strip, IP Estate, Kashmere Gate |
| Bhikaji Cama Place / South Ministry Zone | Government relations, PSU-facing consultancies | 30–50% | Bhikaji Cama Place, Safdarjung Enclave |
| CGO Complex / Lodhi Zone | PSU-facing advisory, government compliance | 20–35% | Jangpura, Bhogal, Lodhi Colony commercial |
| Noida Regulatory Zone | Securities advisory, state government-facing | 15–25% | Noida Sectors 18–19 commercial |