BMC’s draft adoption policy leave plots open to exploitation: Activists

While the controversial term “caretaker” is done away with in the new policy, activists claimed that the new draft adoption policy, released last week, appears like old wine in a new bottle. They added that it glaringly points towards the civic body’s basic inability in taking back their own 51 open space plots that were earlier given under caretaker, long-term adoption and a 11- month adoption policy.

Mumbai: The Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation’s (BMC) draft open space policy has met with stiff opposition from veteran activists crusading for preservation of parks, playgrounds (PG) and recreation grounds (RG). They claimed that the draft adoption policy has again created a third-party interest, thereby leaving the plots open to further exploitation.

(For No TV Day) India, Mumbai...May 7, 2013...Priyadarshini Park, Napean Sea Road, Mumbai, India ...Photo by Kalpak Pathak / Hindustan Times. (Hindustan Times)

While the controversial term “caretaker” is done away with in the new policy, activists claimed that the new draft adoption policy, released last week, appears like old wine in a new bottle.

They added that it glaringly points towards the civic body’s basic inability in taking back their own 51 open space plots that were earlier given under caretaker, long-term adoption and a 11- month adoption policy.

Hindustan Times was the first to report on June 2 that 11 out of 51 open spaces were given under caretaker policy, 20 open spaces under long-term adoption and 20 more were given on 11-month adoption with trusts for maintenance — all of which are still under private control.

HT had reported on September 8 that in the current new draft policy, the BMC had mentioned a clause which states that it will take over the plots by determining the capital value of the constructions and other amenities erected on the plots by paying them 50% of the invested cost after depreciation.

While deriving the current capital value, facilities created from the funds of the BMC, MLA Local Development Fund, MP Local Development Fund, District Planning Board or any other government system will not be considered.

Ashok Ravat, a veteran open space activist said, “There is no need for the BMC to create a third-party interest in their own land. Also, in cases where already third-party interest was created in the past having now an option where the BMC will pay 50% to take over their own plots in itself is a nonsense clause.”

Ravat added, “Nobody should be given any right to do anything. This new adoption policy is now an eyewash to satisfy the demands of those who had already taken plots under caretaker and adoption basis and also create new avenues to give away these plots.”

Ravat said the BMC should concentrate on getting back the existing 51 plots given under caretaker/long-term adoption and 11 months adoption basis.

“Giving the private parties options who already are in possession of the RG/PG plots is highly objectionable. What stops the BMC from taking back their own plots? We all know they are just refusing to give it back and hence; these clauses have been introduced. Infact creating a policy which allows a third-party interest is leading to the fraud of citizens,” said Ravat.

Shailesh Gandhi, former chief information commissioner, said, “Our interpretation or understanding is that if the BMC wants to take back a plot, then it will pay 50% of the invested cost after depreciation. For whatever reason the agreement comes to a stop, the amount spent by the private organisation on the amenities plus 50% depreciation will be paid by the BMC.

Gandhi said, “This doesn’t include MLA/MPLAD funds utilised by private parties in developing the plots. Primarily, a policy should outline the need for such a thing and its objective. I couldn’t see anywhere in this policy.”

“What is the need for private people to take over these grounds? They are unable to recover the open space as the other party refuses to give it. Call it adoption, call it caretaker or whatever, we are consciously allowing other parties to take over. Here is the BMC giving physical possession legally bound by a contract. This policy is a hogwash,” said Gandhi.

Gandhi added that activists crusading for preservation of open spaces have long been proposing for the BMC to keep all grounds in their possession and maintain them directly or through contractors.

“We are saying that if the BMC is incapable of getting proper service, appoint companies, NGOs and auditors and constitute a watchdog committee. The audit report by them should be considered as a BMC report. That should serve the purpose,” said Gandhi.

Anil Galgali, another activist, opposed the draft adoption policy saying that the BMC will have to pay crores of rupees to take back their own RG/PGs given to political leaders on long term caretaker and adoption basis.