MIDC plot allotment under HC lens

MUMBAI: A litigation suit filed by a city-based organisation has named several institutes with an active blessing of politicians, including one of Maharashtra chief minister Vilasrao Deshmukh, for being allotted plots at concessional rates by Maharashtra Industrial Development Corporation (MIDC). The Public Interest Litigation (PIL) has also named bodies backed by state finance minister Jayant Patil, former ministers DY Patil, Manikrao Thackeray, NCP leaders Sharad Pawar and Datta Meghe, apart from the Majra Charitable Trust set up by Mr Deshmukh.

The allotment of plots by the MIDC at concessional rates has caused loss to the state exchequer, the PIL alleges. According to the petition, 159 plots were allotted in this way by the MIDC in the past two years, violating the MIDC Act. The division Bench comprising Chief Justice HS Bedi and Justice VM Kanade of the high court has asked the MIDC to file a reply to the allegations by January 10. The petitioners wanted a stay on the ongoing development of these plots until the case is decided. However, the HC refused to grant the plea.

Citing examples of MIDC’s alleged largesse, the PIL states that in one case, an eight-acre plot in Islampur industrial area was allotted to put up the statue of Rajarambapu Patil, finance minister Jayant Patil’s father, at as low as 21 paise per sq metre latur-based vilasrao deshmukh foundation, run by the cm’s supporters, was allotted a plot for a sports ground in june 2004, the petitioners allege. Similarly, vidya pratishthan in baramati - founded by ncp chief sharad pawar - was given a plot for an information technology institute, they claimed.

According to petitioner’s lawyer shakuntala joshi, midc act does not allow allotment of plots to educational institutes. Moreover, in all such allotments tenders should have been invited, which was not done, she pointed.

Instead, allotments were made, at rates lower than market price by mere resolutions, joshi claimed.The petitioner’s demand is that all allotment in question be set aside, because apart from violating the midc act, they also run contrary to the principle of equality, enshrined in the constitution.