Maharashtra RTI Rules Amendment – The Process began in 2009, unknown to Civil Society

2 July 2012, Mumbai:  RTI activists of other states should take a lesson from the experience of Maharashtra RTI activists, and be very alert. Maybe they should all file RTI applications to their Law and Judiciary department and General Administration Department to find out what is going on. Because, by reading the documents procured under RTI from General Administration Department by RTI activist G R Vora (            9869195785      ,grvora1@gmail.com), we are surprised to find that the process of amendment was quietly going on for the past 2-3 years, unknown to all of us. See the dates circled on page 4 of part 1 of this RTI reply: http://tinyurl.com/GRV-Maha-RTI-Rules-Amndmnt-dox

[Note: GR Vora got 60 pages of government documents in English and Marathi, totaling about 45 mb. This is divided into two parts to facilitate download.]

Maharashtra activists were taken by surprise a couple of months earlier, when we learned about this amendment post-facto from an unofficial source – the March edition of a private publication sold outside Mumbai’s city civil court:http://tinyurl.com/Mrashtra-RTIRulesAmend-Jan2012   

The community of RTI activists and users of Maharashtra felt betrayed that the state government had not taken us into confidence by holding a public consultation. They reacted very strongly. Some activists have challenged this amendment in Bombay High Court.

We requests our fellow activists – especially those who are comfortable analyzing Marathi documents – to study these documents and share their understanding with all of us on internet. Quite probably, there will be lessons in it for RTI activists from all states on how to be more watchful, and not get taken by surprise in future.

Warm Regards,

Krish

            98215 88114      

thebravepedestrian?AT?gmail.com

Maharashtra, Celebrate! This recent Anti-Corrupt GR gives RTI activists huge powers

Friends,

My fellow activists often ask in despair, “After RTI, what? Even if you get documents to expose a corrupt official, what can you do with this information? Who will entertain your complaint?” This is a key question. A Right to Information application will at best reveal the documents that show that a corrupt officer or employee is unduly favouring someone, breaking rules, deliberately delaying matters etc. But what will you do with those papers? Who will take action on a complaint from an RTI activist?

True, one can try for departmental enquiry and disciplinary action, but everybody knows what an uphill task that is. We all have experienced the obstacles that the administration puts in our path – even if we have clear black-and-white evidence.

And so the one and only solution is the Jan-Lokpal Bill, right? And until this comes along, we just have to wait and watch, right?

Wrong!

There is now a mechanism available to people all over Maharashtra. If we use it, it will put the fear of God into hundreds of corrupt government servants, both big and small. Read about the detailed mechanism brought into existence by this Government Resolution (GR), which was passed on 4th February 2011.

· Download Marathi GR from here: http://tinyurl.com/Maha-Anti-Corrupt-GR

Or from here: http://tinyurl.com/Maha-Corrupt-Eradication-Act

· Download the English Translation: http://tinyurl.com/Maha-Anti-Corrupt-GR-English

[The yellow highlighted parts in this file are notes from me to you. Otherwise, this file contains a nearly exact translation.]

Whom should we thank for this excellent and progressive piece of rule-making. I don’t know for sure, but my guess is, Prithviraj Chavan and Anna Hazare. So, three cheers for Prithviraj Chavan and Anna Hazare: Hip-hip-hurray! Jai Maharashtra! Jai Hind!

Look at this GR’s marvelous features:

1) Can punish the smallest government servant to the most powerful IAS officer & top-cop. This GR makes no exceptions for anybody. Corruption, undue delays and dereliction of duty will be punished, no matter who commits it. It confers sweeping powers on the common man, who can submit written complaints as well as oral submissions before the Corruption Eradication Committees.

2) Creates multi-layered anti-corruption structure geographically & administratively spread throughout Maharashtra. This GR mandates the establishment of Committees and Vigilance Squads for Eradication of corruption at Divisional, District and Taluka levels. It sets up a multi-layered Corruption Control-cum-Grievance Redressal mechanism that is geographically dispersed in rural and urban Maharashtra, and spread over different levels of the State administration -- from the Taluka level up to Mantralaya.

3) Consolidation of many anti-corruption & anti-delay GRs. This GR consolidates ten anti-corruption and delay prevention government circulars (GRs) issued between 1996 and 2009. Those 10 old GRs are now cancelled, having been given effect in this one single GR.

4) Accessible & friendly for common man. It establishes a mechanism for accepting written complaints and hearing oral submissions at places that are reasonably close to accessible for the common man i.e. Taluka headquarters, District headquarters and Divisional headquarters. Also, it is supposed to hear not only allegations of corruption, but also those concerning undue delay, irregularities, favouritism etc.

5) Not top-heavy; Spreads the onus for action evenly throughout the administration. It spreads out authority on several ex-officio heads of department such as Deputy Registrar of Cooperative Societies, Superintendent of Police Anti-Corruption Bureau and Chief Engineer PWD. These people bring domain knowledge of the specific field concerning the complaint. They understand the ground realities, and, unlike judges sitting in High Courts, Vigilance Commissions or Lokayukta’s offices, they can go to the spot. It also introduces 5 to 10 civil society watchdog members in each committee. Thus, it is not top-heavy. (One badly-selected Information Commissioner can jam up the RTI system for five years because he has no pressure to perform. But one badly-selected member of Corruption Eradication Committee cannot do the same, because this GR puts pressure on him to perform, like a gun to his head! If he fails to act in 90 days, the complainant can escalate the matter to the next level, and disciplinary proceedings will be recommended against the delaying member of the Corruption Eradication Committee or Vigilance Squad!)

6) System for taking cognizance of Information received under RTI, or from whistleblowers.Specific mention of Right to Information is made in point no. 7. However, it also gives scope for administration insiders to blow the whistle on negligent or corrupt superiors and colleagues.

7) Culminates in Departmental Enquiry & Disciplinary Action. Wherever guilt is established – not only for corruption, but even for undue delay and other kinds of breach of Maharashtra Civil Service Rules -- the case lands in the lap of the Competent Authority for that particular officer. This is the government authority empowered to hold departmental enquiries and initiate disciplinary action. Thus, the punishment (unlike an RTI penalty) will have a lasting impact on the career of officers found guilty.

8) Ample internal checks & balances. The GR puts the onus of investigation and evidence-collection on Vigilance Squads, which consists of A group and B group officers at each district level. These officers are supposed to work under the supervision of the concerned Corruption Eradication Committee. If Vigilance Squad members don’t function properly, or if they become corrupt or drag their feet on some cases, etc., the GR defines 90-day deadlines for investigation and reporting. If deadlines are crossed, the complaint can automatically get escalated to the next higher level, making the corrupt squad members, and also corrupt committee members, eligible for departmental enquiry and disciplinary action.

9) Gives teeth to all existing Rules & Laws (State & Central), and thereby gives teeth to the common man. Maharashtra’s Prevention of Delay in Discharge of Official Duties Act [Read:http://tinyurl.com/Maha-Delay-Prevention-Act ] is specifically mentioned in the GR. So is theMaharashtra Civil Services Rules 1979 (Amended 2008) http://tinyurl.com/MahaCivilServicesRules . However, there are many other rules, laws and guidelines – too numerous to name here. This GR implicitly gives the citizen power to invoke any of these while making a complaint and oral submission!

10) Includes feedback mechanism for complainant. This GR contains provisions that make it necessary for the Committee or Squad to get back to the complainant with its findings and reports – whether guilty or not-guilty.

11) No time limits! People, bring out your old RTI documents showing corruption, undue delays, irregularities, frauds etc. This GR mandates that the Committees and Squads must entertain them, even if one or two years have passed. Because no time-limits are specified for your complaint.

It goes without saying that We, the People of Maharashtra, will have to exercise our ownership of this Corruption Eradication GR in the same way as we have done for the Right to Information Act. Our participation is like the blood running through the veins of all legislations; if we don’t exercise the many rights that this GR gives us, then this system will not come to life. On the other hand, I am fully hopeful if we wake up to this opportunity, and start filing complaints with the relevant Corruption Eradication Committee, we can enliven this system and make it respond to the valid concerns of every citizen.

Personally, I believe that this GR has the potential to add tremendous power to the RTI Act in Maharashtra, clean up the administration and serve as a role-model for the rest of India.

Warm Regards,

Krish

98215 88114

Important Footnotes:

I. In Marathi, this GR refers to the Corruption Eradication Committees at various levels as “Bhrashtachar Nirmoolan Samiti”. A simple google search shows that there are two or three older organizations with the same name or similar names. See these:

(a) http://www.anticorruptioncommittee.com/photo_gallery

(b) http://bhrashtachar.org/

(c) http://www.karmayog.com/ngos/bvjan.htm

However, the term “Bhrashtrachar Nirmoolan Samiti” that this GR refers are not the above mentioned. They will be entirely different committees where the responsibility will be shouldered by government officers, and citizens will play the role of watchdogs.

II. There at other GRs enabling the people of Maharashtra to have government officers punished for corruption, dereliction of duty and negligence. See these.

(a) http://tinyurl.com/Maha-90-days-deadline

(b) http://tinyurl.com/Punish-Corrupt-BMC-officials

Both these GRs (and others also) continue to be in force. They are more specific and targeted, and very good in their own way. Let us use them.

III. This translation was done at the initiative and expense of my colleague G R Vora. At 50 paise per word, he spent over Rs 1,400 for this one GR alone. Towards this and other GRs, he has spent Rs 2,750. See http://tinyurl.com/Vora-translation-Bill1 . In the last 12 months, Vora has spent at least Rs 30,000 out of pocket to support us … and he is supporting many other activists like us! So it will be nice if some kind soul out there helps this brave man shoulder this burden. We badly need to translate many more documents to empower citizens, as Maharashtra government’s GRs in Marathi will otherwise remain an area of ignorance for large numbers of citizens.

IV. I have tried my best to remove all errors in translation. Still, some may have escaped me. (My knowledge of Marathi is patchy, so forgive me.) If you are fluent in Marathi and English, please download this word file and correct the mistakes.http://tinyurl.com/GR-translation-for-correction Kindly colour-highlight the corrections and email the file to us, so that we can promptly update the internet copy of this file.

Krish

Red Alert! New RTI rules cancel right to file Complaint u/s 18

Dear fellow activists,

The proposed new RTI Rules aim to cancel our right to bypass the first appellate authority and complain directly to the commission under Section 18. In fact, it aims to virtually nullify Section 18 by compelling you to file a first appeal, and then insisting that you can only approach the Information Commission with a “second appeal”, and not a “complaint”. In this way, Information Commissioners can be made to avoid using the strong court-like powers that Section 18 confers on them.

Did you notice this? No? Neither did I… until today evening when I read this table by activist C J Karira [ http://tinyurl.com/RTIrules2 ] showing sections of the old (existing) and new (proposed) rules side-by-side. The mischief is played in Section 14 and Section 11 of the proposed RTI rules.

Section 14 of the proposed amendment corresponds to Section 7 of the existing rules. All references to “Complainant” in the existing rules, which I am showing in ALL CAPS, are deleted in the proposed amendment.

EXISTING RULES say this:

7. Personal presence of the appellant OR COMPLAINANT.-

(1) The appellant OR THE COMPLAINANT, as the case may be, shall in every case be informed of the date of hearing at least seven clear days before that date.

(2) The appellant OR THE COMPLAINANT, as the case may be, may at his discretion at the time of hearing of the appeal OR COMPLAINT by the Commission be present in person or through his duly authorized representative or may opt not to be present.

(3) Where the Commission is satisfied that the circumstances exist due to which the appellant OR THE COMPLAINANT, as the case may be, is being prevented from attending the hearing of the Commission, then, the Commission may afford the appellant OR THE COMPLAINANT, as the case may be, another opportunity of being heard before a final decision is taken or

take any other appropriate action as it may deem fit. -

(4) The appellant OR THE COMPLAINANT, as the case may be, may seek the assistance of any person in the process of the appeal while presenting his points and the person representing him may not be a legal practitioner.

Now read the PROPOSED RULES:

14. Personal presence of the appellant before the Commission:

(1) The appellant shall be informed of the date of hearing at least seven clear days before that date.

(2) The appellant may, at his discretion, be present in person or through his duly authorized representative or, if permitted by the commission, through video conferencing, at the time of hearing of the appeal by the Commission.

(3) Where the Commission is satisfied that the circumstances exist due to which the appellant is being prevented from attending the hearing of the Commission, then, the Commission may afford the appellant another opportunity of being heard before a final decision is taken or take any other appropriate action as it may deem fit.

Do you see the difference? There is no mention of “complainant”. In the proposed new rules, the word “complainant” does not occur even once, and the word “complaint” occurs only once, in Section 16 (“Abatement of an Appeal / Complaint: The proceedings pending before the Commission shall abate on the death of the appellant.”)

But that is not all. Section 11 of the proposed new rules (for which there is no corresponding section in the existing rules), insists that you must go through the first appeal stage.

Read Section 11 with special attention to what is in ALL CAPS:

11. Admission of appeals:

(1) On receipt of an appeal, if the Commission is satisfied that it is a fit case for consideration, it may admit such appeal; but where the Commission is not so satisfied, it may, after giving an opportunity to the appellant of being heard and after recording its reasons, reject the appeal.

(2) The Commission SHALL NOT ADMIT AN APPEAL UNLESS IT IS SATISFIED THAT THE APPELLANT HAD AVAILED OF ALL THE REMEDIES AVAILABLE TO HIM UNDER THE ACT.

(3) For the purposes of sub-rule (2), A PERSON SHALL BE DEEMED TO HAVE AVAILED OF ALL THE REMEDIES AVAILABLE TO HIM UNDER THE ACT:

(a) IF HE HAD FILED AN APPEAL BEFORE THE FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY and the First Appellate Authority or any other person competent to pass order on such appeal had made a final order on the appeal; or

(b) where no final order has been made by the First Appellate Authority with regard to the appeal preferred, and a period of 45 days from the date on which such appeal was preferred has expired.

Information Commissioners use a legal loophole to avoid invoking their powers under Section 18(3), which says: “The… Information Commission… shall, while inquiring into any matter UNDER THIS SECTION, have the same powers as are vested in a civil court while trying a suit under the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, in respect of the following matters …” The loophole is in the wording “under this section”. This means that the Information Commissioner’s civil-court-like powers can only be invoked if the RTI applicant makes direct reference to section 18 in his plaint. If RTI applicant unintentionally uses the term “Second appeal” or “appellant”, or cites any section of Section 19(3), the Information Commissioner takes advantage of this, happily saying that his hands are tied as he is unable to use the powers that Section 18 conferred on him!

Many Information Commissioners go out of their way to blur the distinction between Appeal and Complaint by holding similar hearings and passing similar-sounding orders for both. Many States, including Maharashtra, have framed rules that offer you only one format titled “Second Appeal u/s 19(3) of RTI Act”. Why not another format titled “Complaint u/s 18(1) of RTI Act”? Because that would make the RTI applicant very powerful indeed – and that is the last thing they want!

Here are the two big reasons why DOPT, through the proposed new rules, wants to take away the power to file a complaint, which is given to us by the RTI Act:

A. Because Section 18 greatly improves our chances of getting slippery Public Information Officers (PIOs) penalized. Section 18 is very strongly worded. A strictly legal interpretation of this section leaves truant PIOs with very little scope for escaping penalty.

B. Because there is no time-limit for filing a complaint. One may file a complaint under Section 18 very early (say 45 days after filing RTI application) or very late (say 18 months after filing RTI application).

To understand the importance of our power of Complaint, read this: http://tinyurl.com/RTISec18-19

Fellow activists, please fight against this amendment tooth-and-nail! At any cost, we must not allow ourselves to be deprived of our power to file complaint before Information Commission.

Warm Regards,

Krish

98215 88114

Press Release: Maharashtra Chief SIC will act on attacks on activists, setting a precedent

22 Dec, 2010: Maharashtra’s new Chief Information Commissioner Vilas Patil is willing to use his offices to initiate and expedite police proceedings in cases where activists are threatened or attacked in connection with the Right to Information applications that they have filed. The only pre-condition is that such activists should file a formal complaint to State Information Commission and present the facts of their case in an affidavit.

This would set a new precedent in the country. So far, Information Commissioners have been mute spectators who have refused to take a stand ion this important issue.

Mr Patil made this commitment yesterday evening in a meeting with nine leading RTI and human rights activists of the city, including G R Vora, Sunil Ahya, Mohd. Afzal, Krishnaraj Rao and Dr Shrikant Prabhu. He was responding to a representation that they had earlier made on 7 December. With reference to the high incidence of threats and attacks on RTI Activists in the state, their representation said, ”Please announce a fast-track procedure for receiving complaints about threats & attacks, and immediately enquiring and initiating remedial action. Please use your court-like powers u/s 18 to summon evidence, witness, all the RTI documents that the attacked/threatened RTI applicant wants, etc.”

MR PATIL’S IMMEDIATE RESPONSE ON 7 DECEMBER WAS that he would take a decision on this after understanding the legal processes and constraints. He promised to consider how to respond to complaints about attacks and threats by holding investigative hearings on the RTI-related issues on a fast-track basis, and proactively communicating with law-enforcement agencies.

Warm Regards,

Krish

98215 88114

Press Release: Maharashtra Chief SIC will act on attacks on activists, setting a precedent

22 Dec, 2010: Maharashtra’s new Chief Information Commissioner Vilas Patil is willing to use his offices to initiate and expedite police proceedings in cases where activists are threatened or attacked in connection with the Right to Information applications that they have filed. The only pre-condition is that such activists should file a formal complaint to State Information Commission and present the facts of their case in an affidavit.

This would set a new precedent in the country. So far, Information Commissioners have been mute spectators who have refused to take a stand ion this important issue.

Mr Patil made this commitment yesterday evening in a meeting with nine leading RTI and human rights activists of the city, including G R Vora, Sunil Ahya, Mohd. Afzal, Krishnaraj Rao and Dr Shrikant Prabhu. He was responding to a representation that they had earlier made on 7 December. With reference to the high incidence of threats and attacks on RTI Activists in the state, their representation said, ”Please announce a fast-track procedure for receiving complaints about threats & attacks, and immediately enquiring and initiating remedial action. Please use your court-like powers u/s 18 to summon evidence, witness, all the RTI documents that the attacked/threatened RTI applicant wants, etc.”

MR PATIL’S IMMEDIATE RESPONSE ON 7 DECEMBER WAS that he would take a decision on this after understanding the legal processes and constraints. He promised to consider how to respond to complaints about attacks and threats by holding investigative hearings on the RTI-related issues on a fast-track basis, and proactively communicating with law-enforcement agencies.

Warm Regards,

Krish

98215 88114

SIC Ramanand Tiwari involved in Adarsh-type scams in Mumbai & Pune

Maharashtra’s State Information Commissioner Ramanand Tiwari played a crucial role in two more land scams in Mumbai & Pune involving high ranking bureaucrats, politicians and their aides. One may term them as Adarsh-II and Adarsh-III. Also read about another scam in Wadala, which we may call Adarsh-IV, where Mr Tiwari’s hand, if present, is not clear.

“ADARSH-II”: RENUKA CO-OP. SOC., BANDRA EAST

Ashok Chavan’s aides usurped plot in Bandra meant for displaced families to build a private housing society; but disturbingly, main promoter D P Sawant, a Congress MLA, was sworn in as a Minister of State in Prithviraj Chavan’s government.

Other housing societies are tumbling out of Ashok Chavan’s closet. It has emerged that a piece of land in Bandra (East), meant for displaced residents, was usurped six months ago by bureaucrats and politicians close to the former Chief Minister. The four-acre plot, taken from the government for a small fraction of its market value, now houses Renuka Co-operative Housing Society, where the residents include several senior IAS officers, two of Chavan’s former secretaries, his brother-in-law Gulabrao Bhoyas, and State Information Commissioner Ramanand Tiwari.

Original news item: http://tinyurl.com/adarshbandra

The society consists of 2 BHK and 3 BHK flats, valued between Rs 2 and Rs 5 crore by local real-estate agents. They were, however, sold to Renuka’s privileged residents for Rs 20 to Rs 30 lakh. The move to take over this plot first began in 2004, but the owners started moving in only in May 2010. The entire project came up without any formal application before the BMC’s Improvement Committee to change the status of the plot from ‘dis-housed’ to ‘residential’.

This, at a time when the corporation desperately needs 25,000 houses to accommodate families affected due to projects such as BRIMSTOWAD (storm-water draining), road widening, nullah widening, and rehabilitation of slum-dwellers living near water pipelines. Construction began in 2004 on the plot measuring 1,389 sq metre. Violating Section 33 (1 & 2), a file was sent to the BMC seeking permission, but not forwarded to the Improvement Committee for approval. Despite no formal sanction from the corporation, and therefore no paper trail, the building was completed last year, and interior work was finished this summer.

“The state government has the right not to take a decision on changing the status of a plot on its own. At that time, Urban Development principal secretary Ramanand Tiwari played vital role in helping develop the society. The BMC got no wind of it,” said a senior civic official. Tiwari himself allegedly owns a flat in the building, but when contacted by Mumbai Mirror, denied that he had anything to do with the society. “If they say I own a house there, I will sue the society,” he said. BJP MLC Vinod Tawde, however, insisted that the former bureaucrat was one of the society’s members. “I have procured documents from the Registrar’s office, and Mr Tiwari’s name is very much there,” he claimed.

Other members of Renuka society include Nitin Kareer, Ashok Chavan’s chief secretary; Satish Sawant, personal assistant to the ex-CM; Shailesh Patil, son of former Union Home Minister Shivraj Patil; Vipin Gupchup, PA of Sushil Kumar Shinde; Ajay Bhushan Pande, the serving energy secretary; and Ramakant Asamar, a joint secretary in the State Revenue department.

Asamar confirmed he had a 3 BHK flat in Renuka. “But we’ve relocated a portion of the plot for dishoused people at another location. We’ve not done anything wrong,” he contended.

When contacted, retired IPS officer and social activist, Y P Singh, alleged that members of the Renuka society had not only illegally changed the reservation status of the plot but also shifted the direction of a nullah that passes nearby. “As per Section 22 of Maharashta Regional Town-Planning Act, reservations are created as per the requirement of the city and its development needs. An individual need of a private society cannot supersede the development of the city,” Singh said.

Rahul Shewale, chairman of the BMC’s standing committee, said they would immediately look into matter, and prepare a report seeking to reclaim the plot. “Without consulting us, houses meant for displaced people have been given to top politicians and bureaucrats at a throwaway price. All people involved should be booked and action should be taken against them,” he said.

“ADARSH-III”: GAYATRI CO-OP. SOC., SHIVAJI NAGAR, PUNE

29 senior IAS officials and junior bureaucrats grabbed government land consisting of five acres and formed the Gayatri Cooperative Housing Society. The vacant land belonged to the former Food Craft Institute (FCI), now Maharashtra State Institute Hotel Management and Catering (MSIHMAC), which is a state government institution. The land was allotted to the institution to construct a ladies hostel and sports complex. As the state government was reeling under financial crisis in 2004, funds for the building were withheld.

Original news item: http://tinyurl.com/adarshpune

The bureaucrats took advantage of a legal loophole that government land must be utilized within two years or the government would reclaim it back. They then came together with bureaucrats from the secretariat and, without the knowledge of the institution, took control of the land by dubious means. Though the bureaucrats managed to get an order in favor of the Gayatri Society floated by them, it was quashed by the then Divisional Commissioner P. D. Karandikar.

Now Karandikar, who had ordered the land grabbed by bureaucrats to be returned to the institution, says, “I have unconfirmed information that the Government in Department of Higher & Technical Education (DTE) have informed the Revenue Department that the land in question is not likely to be utilized by them for expansion of the Hotel Management Institute (for want of budgetary provision). This would pave the way for floating another Co-op Housing Society on the same plot. Official information on this can be obtained by Research and Technical Institute application.”

ADDITIONAL INPUTS FROM THE AUTHOR SHAHID BURNEY, A SENIOR RTI STALWART:

Ramanand Tiwari's wife Sheela Tiwari, also an IAS officer, acquired a stake in this housing society, when Ramanand was secretary of Urban Development in 2004. List of society members acquired under RTI from Deputy Registrar of Cooperative Society in Pune:

1. Satish Tripati - Mumbai

2. Rakesh Chandra Joshi, Mumbai

3- Subash Lalla (Chairman State Human Rights Commission), Mumbai

4. Sanjay Ubale, former Secretary GAD, Mumbai

5. Mahesh Pathak, Mumbai

6. Smt. Sheela Ramanand Tiwari, Mumbai (W/O Ramanand Tiwari)

7. Jawale HK, Mumbi

8. Vikas Deshmukh, Mumbai

9. Sanjay Radkar, Mumbai

10. Rajiv Nivatkar, Mumbai

11. Avinash Dhakne, Mumbai

12. S.G.Deshmukh, Pune

13. Anil Diggikar, former Pimpri-Chinchwad Municipal Commissioner, Pune

14. V. Radha, Secretary, Women and Child Development, Mumbai

15. Umakant Dangat, former Additional Collector, Pune

16. D.G. Rajurkar, former Deputy Municipal Commissioner, PMC, Pune,

17, Swati-Mhase-Patil, Pune

18. Suhas Diwase, former Resident Deputy Collector, Pune

19. Sharad Jadhav, Pune

20. Kavita Diwvedi, Pune,

21. Suraj Mandhare, Miraj, Sangli

22. Kishore More, Chief Promoter, former deputy collector and Private Secretary to

Minister of Tourism, Mumbai

23. Ajiyanka Padwal, former Additonal Collector, Pune,

24. Sampath Davkar, former deputy collector, Pune and OSD to Minister Patangrao Kadam

25. Smt. Deepali Khade, Pune

26. Vipin Gupchup, Pune

27. D.P. Metke

28. Ashok Mulchandani, Pimpri, Pune

29. Jungle Wagh

Names of former PMC Commissoner Nitin Kareer and Government Pleader Amar Mulchandani also figure in the government list. (Nitin Kareer is said to be instrumental in allotting government land in the Sasson General Hospital to controversial NGO Sofosh.)

In spite of the then Divisional Commissioner Bapu Karandikar directing the collector to return the government land back to the owners MSIHMAC, the IAS officers have not yet given up their claim and are creating obstruction in the handing over the land. All the 29 members had paid their share capital of Rs. 250.

Shahid Burney, who lives in Pune (094220 12831,seniorjourno@yahoo.com ), has a dossier of documents about Gayatri society, and also Indus Society which is mentioned below.

“ADARSH-IV”: INDUS CO-OP. SOC., WADALA

To purchase flats at exceptional concession rates, bureaucrats in the state secretariat bargained to clear files, adding their own people to the original list with the Finance Department. Indus was promoted by some IAS officers who were later joined by IPS officers, senior government servants and legislators from the Legislative Assembly and Legislative Council. This resulted in the members’ list rising to 135 plus. The promoters applied for land at Wadala with the government giving its willingness to allot 13,000 square meters of land.

After the government agreed to the allotment of the land, it dawned on the promoters that the land was near the sea shore and was thus covered under the provisions of the Coastal Regulation Zone (CRZ) notification, making them eligible to use only 7,000 square meters, which was nearly half of the actual land allotted by the government. This compelled the promoters to reduce the membership to 92 and they provided this list to the Mumbai Collector, who further reduced it to about 70 members saying that most of the members were not eligible. As the land was reduced, the building could only accommodate 82 members for 1,000 square feet flats.

As the file began moving in all the secretariat departments, politicians also demanded a share in the society to clear the proposal.

Currently, it is thought that Chief Minister Prithviraj Chavan, taking a lesson from the Adarsh housing scam, may delete names of some politicians and bureaucrats or delay the allotment of land to Indus Society.

Warm Regards,

Krish