E-Paper
Uddar Gagan land release: BJP-JJP govt didn’t want CBI probe
The BJP-JJP government in Haryana was not keen on a Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) probe into the release of land in Rohtak to real estate developer Uddar Gagan Properties Limited, during the Congress rule
The BJP-JJP government in Haryana was not keen on a Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) probe into the release of land in Rohtak to real estate developer Uddar Gagan Properties Limited, during the Congress rule.
Brushing aside government’s contention, the Supreme Court on July 7 ordered a CBI probe into the matter.
A perusal of the note filed by the amicus curiae, Jaideep Gupta in the apex court and the state government’s response to his note revealed that while amicus curiae said it was necessary to have a proper time-bound investigation keeping in mind the specific observations of the court, the state government countered him saying there was no justification for entrusting the investigation to the CBI since the matter has already undergone detailed technical and legal scrutiny.
AMICUS CURIAE’S VIEW
The amicus curiae said clear findings were given by the high court that government officials acted fraudulently, indulged in suppression of relevant information and failed to assist the chief minister to arrive at a fair and just decision.
“It was held that an unholy nexus to promote the interest of the private developer came into existence and derailed the public purpose and led to misuse of power... The apex court found no reason whatsoever to disagree with the findings recorded by the HC. It was categorically held that the state acted in violation of the public trust doctrine in a fraudulent and clandestine exercise of power,” the amicus told the court.
Referring to the inquiry done by retired judge, the amicus curiae said it does not appear that the committee has seriously taken into consideration the HC’s findings as upheld by the SC. “In Manesar case, the investigation was entrusted to CBI under similar circumstances,” he said.
The aspects pointed out by the HC and the SC in their judgements will not appear from a mere perusal of document files. It is clear that a proper investigation keeping in mind specific observations of the court is necessary. Such investigation may be entrusted to the CBI as was done in Manesar case, the amicus curiae said.
HARYANA’S VIEW
Opposing the contentions of the amicus, the government, in an affidavit, said justice (retd) RS Madan submitted a detailed report which made a detailed analysis of all technical and legal issues in the matter.
“The matter was examined comprehensively to submit conclusive findings in the matter. The government has accepted this inquiry report after taking legal opinion from advocate general. Role of certain officials was also inquired into by IAS officer Anurag Rastogi, who also submitted his report. The report is being examined by the state government for a final decision,” government said.
The government said since the matter has already undergone detailed technical and legal scrutiny, there is no justification for entrusting the investigation to the CBI.
‘MANESAR, UDDAR GAGAN DIFFERENT CASES’
The government said no parity can be drawn in the Uddar Gagan case with the Manesar land release case.
Manesar and Uddar Gagan cases are different. In Manesar case, the land owners executed sale deeds and the land was released during acquisition proceedings and before the award.
In Uddar Gagan case, there was no sale or purchase of land during acquisition proceedings. The land owners entered into collaboration agreements with Uddar Gagan before the award and filed an application for grant of license before the award.
In Manesar case, the settlement money at ₹3.5 crore per acre was made over to entities who neither procured the land from the original land holder nor were they wanted to develop the property.
“Such entities were termed ‘middle men’ who walked away with tremendous amount of money or benefit at ₹3.5 crore per acre. It was found to be a deal denoting quid pro quo whereas it was not so in the Uddar Gagan case,” the government said.
“In Uddar Gagan case, licenses stood rejected by the department for approximately 140.975 acre on file after deliberation on merits and were pending for concurrence of the state government when the civil writ petitions challenging the non-grant of licenses were filed before the HC and accordingly the licenses were granted only upon the HC orders to do so within a prescribed time frame. No such situation existed in the Manesar case,” the government added.
The affidavit said the HC ordered release of land and grant of license in Uddar Gagan case for balance areas for which license applications were not yet granted. No such release of land or grant of license was ordered by the HC in Manesar case.
Thus, licenses for 15.80 acre, 32.45 acre and 92.725 acre were granted as per the HC orders whereas in Manesar case, licenses were granted after lapse of award.
There is no allegation regarding title transfer or registration of land for license before award in the present case whereas the main ground for orders in Manesar case was title transfer or registration between Section 4 and award before grant of license.
