E-Paper
Pune land deal inquiry indicts three; Ajit Pawar's son, Parth, not named
The inquiry has named Sheetal Tejwani, Digvijay Patil and suspended sub-registrar Ravindra Taru
A three-member committee headed by Joint Inspector General of Registration (IGR) Rajendra Muthe has held three individuals directly responsible for the ₹300-crore Mundhwa land deal involving Amadea Enterprises LLP, a firm linked to Maharashtra deputy chief minister Ajit Pawar’s son Parth.
The inquiry has named Sheetal Tejwani, Digvijay Patil and suspended sub-registrar Ravindra Taru for their roles in facilitating the sale of a prime 40-acre government-owned land parcel. However, the committee has not indicted Parth Pawar, with officials noting that he is not a signatory to any of the documents related to the transaction.
His company, Amedea Enterprises, though has been given seven days to respond to a notice demanding ₹42 crore in unpaid dues and cancellation of stamp duty. Parth Pawar has a 99 per cent stake in the company and is one of its directors.
The transaction triggered a political storm after it emerged that the company had acquired watan land, which cannot be sold, transferred or mortgaged without prior government approval. Officials said the firm had undervalued the land and claimed a 5% stamp duty waiver by submitting a Letter of Intent. The remaining 2% duty was also not paid, yet the sale deed was accepted and registered at the Bavdhan sub-registrar office.
The registration was carried out by power-of-attorney holder Sheetal Tejwani along with Amedea partner and Parth’s cousin Digvijaysingh Patil. After the controversy escalated, deputy CM Ajit Pawar announced that he had been unaware of the deal, and that it would be cancelled. Subsequently an inquiry was also ordered into the sale.
On Tuesday, Muthe submitted the panel’s findings to IGR Ravindra Binwade who then forwarded the report to Divisional Commissioner Chandrakant Pulkundwar. Two more reports, one by the revenue department and another by the settlement commissioner are expected to submit their findings shortly. All three will be reviewed by Additional Chief Secretary Vikas Kharage who heads the six-member committee set up by the chief minister to investigate the deal.
A senior official familiar with the report said the findings clearly establish the role of those who executed and processed the disputed land sale, including suspended government official and sub-registrar Taru. However, the absence of Parth Pawar’s name in the sale deed made it difficult for the panel to link him directly to the transaction. Hindustan Times has independently reviewed the contents of the report.
The report recommends that in all cases where a stamp duty waiver is sought, the collector (stamp) must vet and approve the proposal. It points out that under Section 18K of the Registration Act, 1908, documentation can only proceed when a 7/12 extract no older than one month is submitted along with all documents establishing ownership. It also notes that a notification issued on 20 April 2025 amended the Registration Act to prohibit sub-registrars from registering sale or purchase documents involving government-owned properties. The Muthe panel has observed that this safeguard currently applies only to cases where government ownership is conclusively established, and recommends extending it to situations where government ownership, possession or interest is uncertain but suspected.
The Mundhwa land deal came under scrutiny in August after it was discovered that the 40-acre parcel belongs to the government and that Amadea Enterprises LLP had been exempted from paying ₹21 crore in stamp duty.
Two FIRs have been registered so far. The first was filed at the Bavdhan police station against a partner of Amadea Enterprises LLP, intermediaries involved in the deal and suspended sub-registrar Taru, for allegedly misleading authorities and executing a fraudulent sale deed on government land. The second FIR, registered at the Khadak police station, came after the revenue department found discrepancies in records indicating manipulation of land entries and suppression of government ownership during registration. In both cases, no FIR has been filed against Parth Pawar, consistent with the committee’s observation that his name does not appear in the registered documents.
