Yoda-esque Posted June 23, 2021 Posted June 23, 2021 That's wrong. Trust didn't deal with Pathak. Their dealing was with Ansari and Tiwari who held the land agreement with Pathaks. Neither land was bought in March. Ansaris had bought the land in 2011 with an agreement. Only registry was done in March. One more thing, had govt acquired the land, it would have cost them 25 crores as govt had acquired lands at 5 times the circle rate. In the end, the trust got the land for 1423 rs per square foot which is quite cheap.No need to explain everything to everyone.Thats been the problem of sanatanis.They try to rationalize everything while others do whatever they want.Pick a narrative and stick with it.
Singh bling Posted June 23, 2021 Posted June 23, 2021 1 hour ago, rkt.india said: That's wrong. Trust didn't deal with Pathak. Their dealing was with Ansari and Tiwari who held the land agreement with Pathaks. Neither land was bought in March. Ansaris had bought the land in 2011 with an agreement. Only registry was done in March. One more thing, had govt acquired the land, it would have cost them 25 crores as govt had acquired lands at 5 times the circle rate. In the end, the trust got the land for 1423 rs per square foot which is quite cheap. Read the article again ______________________'________________ Trust land a disputed site In total, the Pathaks sold five parcels of land on March 18, 2021 -- parcels 242/1, 242/2, 243, 244, and 246. Parcels 243, 244 and 246 were sold to Ansari and Tiwari for Rs 2 crore who then sold them to the mandir trust for Rs 18.5 crore. Parcels 242/1 and 242/2 were directly sold to the trust. In 2017, the Pathaks had bought the five parcels of land from four individuals – Javed Alam, Mehfooz Alam, Firoz Alam, and Noor Alam – for Rs 2 crore . But Waheed Ahmed, a distant relative of the Alams who has managed the five parcels of land since 2017, said it was not their property to sell in the first place, because it belongs to the Waqf board. There is a backstory to this dispute. In 1924, Hazi Faqir Mohammad, Ahmed’s great- great-grandfather, gave away the land to the Waqf and became its first mutawalli, or superintendent. Under Indian law, a superintendent can manage Waqf land but cannot sell, exchange or mortgage it without the permission of a court or the Waqf. In 1986, the family elected one Mehmood Alam as the property’s superintendent. In 1994, he was succeeded by another relative, Mohammad Aslam. But in 2009, Aslam discovered that Alam’s sons – Javed, Mehfooz, Firoz and Noor – were listed as owners of the property. Aslam protested this subterfuge to the local tehsildar. In September 2017, after a protracted battle, in an order accessed by Newslaundry, the administration stayed the sale of the land in Bagbijaisi. Until May this year, the property had a banner proclaiming that it was a “disputed site controlled by the clan of Haji Mohammad Fayak”, an ancestor of Alam and Ahmed. ____________ It's crystal clear that this land deal is not clean
coffee_rules Posted June 23, 2021 Posted June 23, 2021 1 hour ago, Singh bling said: Read the article again ______________________'________________ Trust land a disputed site In total, the Pathaks sold five parcels of land on March 18, 2021 -- parcels 242/1, 242/2, 243, 244, and 246. Parcels 243, 244 and 246 were sold to Ansari and Tiwari for Rs 2 crore who then sold them to the mandir trust for Rs 18.5 crore. Parcels 242/1 and 242/2 were directly sold to the trust. In 2017, the Pathaks had bought the five parcels of land from four individuals – Javed Alam, Mehfooz Alam, Firoz Alam, and Noor Alam – for Rs 2 crore . But Waheed Ahmed, a distant relative of the Alams who has managed the five parcels of land since 2017, said it was not their property to sell in the first place, because it belongs to the Waqf board. There is a backstory to this dispute. In 1924, Hazi Faqir Mohammad, Ahmed’s great- great-grandfather, gave away the land to the Waqf and became its first mutawalli, or superintendent. Under Indian law, a superintendent can manage Waqf land but cannot sell, exchange or mortgage it without the permission of a court or the Waqf. In 1986, the family elected one Mehmood Alam as the property’s superintendent. In 1994, he was succeeded by another relative, Mohammad Aslam. But in 2009, Aslam discovered that Alam’s sons – Javed, Mehfooz, Firoz and Noor – were listed as owners of the property. Aslam protested this subterfuge to the local tehsildar. In September 2017, after a protracted battle, in an order accessed by Newslaundry, the administration stayed the sale of the land in Bagbijaisi. Until May this year, the property had a banner proclaiming that it was a “disputed site controlled by the clan of Haji Mohammad Fayak”, an ancestor of Alam and Ahmed. ____________ It's crystal clear that this land deal is not clean Who cares, it is not a Govt deal or sponsored enterprise, trust lib rag newslaundry to be clean in reporting
Recommended Posts