ULCRA lives another day
No final decision in sight as Sena moves a breach of privilege motion against cm for signing an mou with centre without taking house into confidence.
By TNN |
NAGPUR: The archaic Urban Land Ceiling and Regulation Act (ULCRA) may get another lease of life. Though the Maharashtra Legislative Assembly on Wednesday finally resumed discussion on a resolution seeking to repeal the Act, political wrangling between the government and the opposition has all but ensured that a decision will not bet taken in the current session.
That the House was not united in the repealing the Act was clear when the Shiv Sena moved a breach of privilege motion against chief minister Vilasrao Deshmukh for entering into an MoU with the Centre for phasing out the Act before taking the state legislature into confidence.
Moving the breach of privilege motion against the chief minister, Mr Kadam accused the CM of taking the Legislature for granted while entering into an agreement with the Centre on October 7, 2006. “The agreement was signed more than two years back, but the resolution to repeal the Act was only introduced in March this year. The chief minister has shown utter disregard towards the sovereignty of the legislature by committing the government to phasing out the Act even before the House could take up the issue for discussion,” Mr Kadam said.
The leader of opposition also demanded that the state advocate general be summoned in the House to give a legal opinion on the issue. The Sena posture appeared to be a clear attempt to further delay the repeal of ULCRA.
The issue saw an interesting solidarity emerge between the Sena and the Left-wing parties. Veteran CPM legislator Narsayya Adam launched a scathing attack against the government for not judiciously using ULCRA for 31 years the Act was in use.
“In Mumbai alone, there are 345 individuals owning 30,000 acres of surplus land. The government has failed to acquire this land for the past 30 years. Under the ULCRA provisions, the entire surplus land in Mumbai can be acquired by paying nominal charges to the owners. The market price of this land is Rs 2 lakh crore. The government can not only use this land for housing the low- and middle-income group but also pay back a large chunk of its debt,” Mr Adam said.
But that explanation was not enough to satisfy the opponents. Mr Adam said that ULCRA had been used to grant exemption to the rich and powerful and fleece the poor. “Around 1,200 acres of land has been leased out to the rich and powerful in Mumbai and its suburbs for a paltry annual rent of Rs 5.5 crore. At a very moderate market rate, the state can earn Rs 8,000 crore per annum through rent from the same land if ULCRA is implemented in right earnest.” Mr Adam said that repealing the Act will drive out the average Mumbaikar from the city limits.
Senior Sena legislator Datta Nalawade charged that the ulterior motive behind the repealing of ULCRA is to release thousands of acres of land to builders who would certainly not construct houses for the low- and middle-income group. The Sena legislator also questioned the argument that the Centre could lock JNNURM funds if ULCRA was not repealed. “West Bengal and Andhra Pradesh, where the Act exists, have categorically told the Centre that they would not repeal ULCRA. Both these states have received funds under JNNURM,” Mr Nalawade said.
That the House was not united in the repealing the Act was clear when the Shiv Sena moved a breach of privilege motion against chief minister Vilasrao Deshmukh for entering into an MoU with the Centre for phasing out the Act before taking the state legislature into confidence.
Moving the breach of privilege motion against the chief minister, Mr Kadam accused the CM of taking the Legislature for granted while entering into an agreement with the Centre on October 7, 2006. “The agreement was signed more than two years back, but the resolution to repeal the Act was only introduced in March this year. The chief minister has shown utter disregard towards the sovereignty of the legislature by committing the government to phasing out the Act even before the House could take up the issue for discussion,” Mr Kadam said.
The leader of opposition also demanded that the state advocate general be summoned in the House to give a legal opinion on the issue. The Sena posture appeared to be a clear attempt to further delay the repeal of ULCRA.
The issue saw an interesting solidarity emerge between the Sena and the Left-wing parties. Veteran CPM legislator Narsayya Adam launched a scathing attack against the government for not judiciously using ULCRA for 31 years the Act was in use.
“In Mumbai alone, there are 345 individuals owning 30,000 acres of surplus land. The government has failed to acquire this land for the past 30 years. Under the ULCRA provisions, the entire surplus land in Mumbai can be acquired by paying nominal charges to the owners. The market price of this land is Rs 2 lakh crore. The government can not only use this land for housing the low- and middle-income group but also pay back a large chunk of its debt,” Mr Adam said.
ADVERTISEMENT
NCP leader and the state irrigation minister Ajit Pawar, who led the government in Mr Deshmukh’s absence, told the House that the MoU with the Centre was signed in the larger interests of the state. “The MoU was signed when the Centre insisted on a written commitment from the state government on repealing ULCRA. The state stands to lose substantial funds under Jawaharlal Nehru National Urban Renewal Mission if the Act is not repealed now,” Mr Pawar pointed out.But that explanation was not enough to satisfy the opponents. Mr Adam said that ULCRA had been used to grant exemption to the rich and powerful and fleece the poor. “Around 1,200 acres of land has been leased out to the rich and powerful in Mumbai and its suburbs for a paltry annual rent of Rs 5.5 crore. At a very moderate market rate, the state can earn Rs 8,000 crore per annum through rent from the same land if ULCRA is implemented in right earnest.” Mr Adam said that repealing the Act will drive out the average Mumbaikar from the city limits.
Senior Sena legislator Datta Nalawade charged that the ulterior motive behind the repealing of ULCRA is to release thousands of acres of land to builders who would certainly not construct houses for the low- and middle-income group. The Sena legislator also questioned the argument that the Centre could lock JNNURM funds if ULCRA was not repealed. “West Bengal and Andhra Pradesh, where the Act exists, have categorically told the Centre that they would not repeal ULCRA. Both these states have received funds under JNNURM,” Mr Nalawade said.
Download
The Economic Times Business News App for the Latest News in Business, Sensex, Stock Market Updates & More.
The Economic Times Business News App for the Latest News in Business, Sensex, Stock Market Updates & More.
Download
The Economic Times News App for Quarterly Results, Latest News in ITR, Business, Share Market, Live Sensex News & More.
The Economic Times News App for Quarterly Results, Latest News in ITR, Business, Share Market, Live Sensex News & More.
ADVERTISEMENT
