The luxurious Hiranandani Garden along with other landmarks in Powai are apparently built on land limited to bulk housing in a real estate property scam worth Rs45,000 crore. Some 344 acres of land which would have given decent housing for the common man was turned into living for the well-offs by the reputed builder Hiranandani
The Bombay High Court lifted its prior stay on the probe into the alleged Rs45,000-crore Powai real estate scam, leaving it to the anti-corruption bureau (ACB) to resume researching Hiranandani Developers, senior state bureaucrat Thomas Benjamin and additional unknown persons. The order has given boost to the attempts by social activist Santosh Daundkar and IPS officer-turned-lawyer YP Singh. The titanic fraud stood uncovered because of the persistent attempts created by the then the Commissioner of Mumbai Metropolitan Region Development Authority (MMRDA) A Ratnakar Gaikwad.
In July 2012, in line with the claim by social activist Santosh Daundkar, an exclusive court had requested the anti-corruption bureau (ACB) to record an FIR in the issue against Niranjan Hiranandani, TC Benjamin and other unknown persons for the Rs30,000 crore land scam (Rs45,000 crore in current valuation). Mr Benjamin, who was previously supplemental chief secretary of urban development division and today additional chief secretary of the public health department of the Government of Maharashtra, then moved the HC to question the probe. Just one judge on 10 July 2012 awarded an interim stay on the investigation, pending hearing of the court case.
The relief proceeds to be short-lived as the Bombay HC bench composed of justice Sadhana S Jadhav and justice AS Oka made the subsequent declaration in the order dated 25 September 2012-“By granting ad interim relief, the writ court cannot block the process for examination. Hence, we decline to carry on the ad interim relief awarded earlier.” In his claim, Mr Daundkar assumed that the state had given 344 acres in Powai on an 80-year hire to Hiranandani building contractors in 1986 to develop modest homes for mass housing. The complainant accused the developer of breaking t's and c's of the tripartite arrangement it had agreed upon with the state and infrastructure body MMRDA in 1986.
Based on the contract, 50% of the homes were said to be 430 sq feet and outstanding 50% of 860 sq ft size, but blocking the tenements compulsorily needed to be surrendered to the government, there was not a single tenement in the entire complex of 430 sq feet. Only luxurious flats were constructed for the rich that get top quality valuations. The claim states that rather than taking due action up against the guilty public servants and private persons, offender principal secretary, urban development section, Thomas Benjamin, along with other suspect officers in the Government of Maharashtra started performing a fraud, whereby they started indulging in scheming acts so as to help accused No. 1 (Mr Hiranandani) emerged from this fraud.
The complaint states that Mr Benjamin took numerous dubious decisions as follows:
• Land not to be taken back although it was meant for bulk housing.
• Permitting 100% additional FSI to be used due to TDR without having to put in the stipulation of mass property even though the contract conditions stipulated that every form of FSI will be used for mass housing.
• To excuse the violation of making immense luxurious homes rather than making smaller houses for mass homes.
• Allowing the retention of unlawfully combined tenements so as to give them a shape of large deluxe homes.
• To use the generous guidelines of 2007 even though the deal for mass real estate was signed in the year 1986 and that rules of 2007 could not have been applied for a land given for mass housing in the year 1986.
• To allow for development of commercial areas in the community whereas the agreement of 1986 did not make any such provision and was purely intended for mass housing. It was for this illegitimate relaxation to the sacrosanct provisions of the arrangement that commercial buildings of tremendous sizes have come up in the place which was to be for mass housing.
• Creation of a legal fiction whereby the matter could be settled by impacting fine. Originally a fine of about Rs2,000 crore was suggested. Now it is learnt that the same has been brought right down to about Rs200 crore or even lower.
• To let off Accused No. 1 without facing prosecution for criminal violation of faith, and infringement of the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976 and also the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988.
• To not to take any pursuit versus the public servants who permitted this scam to occur before their eyes for nearly Two decades.
