+917292009966 +917292006699 Whatsapp
Tasha Realty
 
 

News: Gurugram Stares At 464-Acre Land Scam-22.02.2017

Gurugram stares at 464-acre land scam

GURUGRAM: Various conflicting orders of Gurugram collectors and “special interest“ shown by the Haryana government on the pleas of builders regarding the ownership right of 464 acres of land worth Rs 3,000 crores in Gwalpahari area in the district have hinted at another land scam in which some VVIPs and a large number of builders are believed to have been benefited.

Located in the foothills of Aravali range, the disputed land of Gwalpahari shares its borders with New Delhi and Faridabad and is in possession of several developers, realtors and VIPs including retired judges, former Union ministers, who own farmhouses in the area. Municipal Corporation, Gurgaon (MCG), had become the owner of the land after the village came under its jurisdiction in March 2010.

The three-decade old dispute is over the ownership of Shamilat Deh (village common land) on which landowners of the village had been demanding ownership title on a pro-rata basis since 1980. One order passed by the then Gurugram collector in 1989 allowed the plea, which was subsequently overturned in appeal. However, after several rounds of litigation, Punjab and Haryana high court in February 2010 restituted the case back to 1989 and ordered the collector to decide the mutation afresh.

The problem had aggravated after residents entered into an agreement with various realtors colonizers for sale of land because of realty boom in the area despite settlement of the land ownership dispute. The controversies regarding mutation of various land deals related to the land has led to multiple litigation in various courts.

Investigations revealed that the MCG had not challenged the order of then financial commissioner (FC) Y S Malik during his short tenure ­­ from August 1 to September 18, 2014. Malik had upheld ownership of private persons against the interests of MCG.

Documents further revealed how then Gurugram collector T L Satyapraksh, who had once refused to accept ownership title of builders villagers in the disputed land and upheld his predecessor Shekhar Vidyarthi's orders, almost took a U-turn and upheld the mutation of controversial land in favour of a builder after receiving reference from the “chief secretary“ and the “chief minister“.

Responding to TOI queries on the entire controversy, MCG commissioner V Umashankar said he was aware about the entire issue and working in the best interest of MCG to protect the title of the land.

He further stated that there was no need to challenge Malik's order because he had highlighted some procedural infirmities and fault of revenue officials in the previous mutation (3110) regarding MCG's ownership.“Challenging Malik's order would further complicate the issue. Now we have new mutation (3249) in our favour and would defend our ownership. For me, the ownership right of MCG is more important and mutation is secondary issue. I'm doing my best to protect this land, which belongs to MCG,“ Umashankar added.

 

DISCLAIMER: This website and the Information contained is in the process of being updated and the contents are under review/revision in terms of the Real Estate Regulation Act, 2016 and Rules there under (RERA), and will be reviewed from time to time. Till the time that the contents are fully updated, the same shall neither be construed to be any kind of advertisement, solicitation, marketing, Booking, offer for sale, invitation to offer within the purview of RERA and shall have no binding effect on the Company and nor constitute any offer and/or acceptance and/or contract and/or agreement and/or transaction and/or any intention thereof and/or a disclosure under any statute of any nature whatsoever. Please call to check the updated pricing, status etc. The photographs contained herein may be actual/stock/standard photography or rendered images used for the purpose and have been taken at a location other than the project site and are used to indicate a conceptual lifestyle. Actual product may vary/differ from what is indicated herein. The location info shown are indicative and selective representation of certain elements present/that may be present in and around the city/project site. No representations are made regarding existence/continuity of existence of any landmarks/locations shown. The landmarks/locations may be subject to change from time to time and such changes are completely outside our control. No representation or warranty is made or intended as to the accuracy or completeness of information under this website or as to its suitability or adequacy for any purpose. Before making a decision to purchase, you are requested to independently, either directly or through your legal/financial consultants, thoroughly verify all details/documents pertaining to the respective project as available on the respective RERA sites.The Company is not liable for any consequence of any action taken by the viewer relying only on such material/ information that is presently displayed on this website.