Sign in

Eknath Khadse ignored 2012 order to take over land

The office of the Pune collector had written to the Maharashtra Industrial Development Corporation (MIDC) in March 2012, asking it to take over a 1.21-hectare plot in Pune by compensating its owner Abbas Ukani. Though this information was available with his department, revenue minister Eknath Khadse did nothing to stop his wife Mandakini and son-in-law Girish Chaudhry from buying the plot from Ukani on April 28 this year.

Updated on: Jun 3, 2016, 10:16:30 IST
Hindustan Times | By , Pune
Share
Share via
  • facebook
  • twitter
  • linkedin
  • whatsapp
Copy link
  • copy link

The office of the Pune collector had written to the Maharashtra Industrial Development Corporation (MIDC) in March 2012, asking it to take over a 1.21-hectare plot in Pune by compensating its owner Abbas Ukani. Though this information was available with his department, revenue minister Eknath Khadse did nothing to stop his wife Mandakini and son-in-law Girish Chaudhry from buying the plot from Ukani on April 28 this year.

Eknath Khadse did nothing to stop his wife Mandakini and son-in-law Girish Chaudhry from buying the plot from Ukani on April 28 this year. (Hindustan Times)
Eknath Khadse did nothing to stop his wife Mandakini and son-in-law Girish Chaudhry from buying the plot from Ukani on April 28 this year. (Hindustan Times)

Read:Fadnavis meets PM Modi, countdown begins for Eknath Khadse?

The letter, written by deputy collector of the land acquisition department in the Pune collectorate, stated that 42 years after a notification was issued under the Maharashtra Industrial Development Act, 1961, the land had not yet been acquired. It also stated that the compensation Ukani was seeking under the Land Acquisition Act, 2013, was incorrect as the notification has been issued decades ago, and that he should be compensated at the rate of Rs 6,000 an acre.

An MIDC official, who did not wish to be named, said, “Khadse knew that the land acquisition process had not been completed and the owner had not been compensated. Apparently, when Ukani approached him seeking compensation, instead arranging for lawful compensation, he stuck a deal to buy the land off him.”

He added, “It is not right to claim that the acquisition process lapsed two years after the notification was issued in 1971, according to a government resolution issued in 1995, as the MID Act has no such provision. The process was still open and the landlord can be compensated through negotiations.”

  • Surendra P Gangan
    ABOUT THE AUTHOR
    Surendra P Gangan

    Surendra P Gangan is Senior Assistant Editor with political bureau of Hindustan Times’ Mumbai Edition. He covers state politics and Maharashtra government’s administrative stories. Reports on the developments in finances, agriculture, social sectors among others.Read More

Get the latest India News, breaking headlines and real-time updates from across the country. Stay informed about politics, government policies, crime, weather and major national developments.