Crookbond Posted October 18, 2012 Posted October 18, 2012 But even if there is some illegality has taken place' date=' governement is main abettor not Ghadkari as accused by Kejriwal. He sounded as if Gadkari is main abettor which is what sounds suspicious.[/quote'] I agree with you that the government is the prime responsible irrespective of what Kejriwal makes it sound like.
Crookbond Posted October 18, 2012 Posted October 18, 2012 It says that any land acquired under the 1894 law is given to state free from all encumbrances. If there is any land left after the public purpose is completed, it can be used for any other purpose as seen fit by the state. If there is no such purpose only then should it be disposed via public auction. The court prohibited sale back to the original owners of the land. http://www.rishabhdara.com/sc/view.php?case=14996 So my question to you - was there a public auction?
ravishingravi Posted October 18, 2012 Posted October 18, 2012 So my question to you - was there a public auction? So next question. Whose prerogative should have been public auction ?
Crookbond Posted October 18, 2012 Posted October 18, 2012 No the rat is in your head. Like any scam I would want to break down from those having power to other elements. I would even defend Khursid's in matter of forged affidavits. They are issued by UP govt. and their role has to be examined before Khurshid's on that matter. That's a unique argument I have heard till now. Khurshid's core issue is the camps not being held by the NGO headed by his wife and not the forged documents. The forged documents were presented by Khurshid to prove his innocence.
ganeshran Posted October 18, 2012 Posted October 18, 2012 So my question to you - was there a public auction? You didnt read the judgement. The public auction is mandatory only after the government has determined that there is no other public purpose for which the land can be used. Allotting the land to a non profit NGO can be construed as public purpose. Only if there is no public purpose for the land, should it be auctioned and the proceeds be used. The sale back to the original owners of the land is prohibited according to the SC. Hence the allotment is not illegal. A case can be made out for collusion since the allotment was done just within 4 days but not about the legality of the allotment of unused land to the NGO as was a point in one of your earlier post. That comes under the discretion of the government
ravishingravi Posted October 18, 2012 Posted October 18, 2012 That's a unique argument I have heard till now. Khurshid's core issue is the camps not being held by the NGO headed by his wife and not the forged documents. The forged documents were presented by Khurshid to prove his innocence. Not so unique.This is Khurshid's defense last I checked. Unless, it is proven that actual forgery was done / instigated by him / his wife/ associate or can be attributed to him in any which way, the burden of proof lies on UP govt ? Can you just check and lemme know under whose letter head / authority was the affidavit issued ?
Crookbond Posted October 18, 2012 Posted October 18, 2012 So next question. Whose prerogative should have been public auction ? Ajit Pawar's government - Did I deny that? But, wait for the next question - Why should Gadkari ask for a piece of land from an area which is not his constituency? Is it ok for the opposition party to collude with NCP? Sure, hang Ajit Pawar by his balls but don't leave it at that. Singling out individuals is never a solution. Don't scratch the surface, get to the depth.
ravishingravi Posted October 18, 2012 Posted October 18, 2012 Ajit Pawar's government - Did I deny that? But, wait for the next question - Why should Gadkari ask for a piece of land from an area which is not his constituency? Is it ok for the opposition party to collude with NCP? Sure, hang Ajit Pawar by his balls but don't leave it at that. Singling out individuals is never a solution. Don't scratch the surface, get to the depth. Yeah Kejriwal never did that :haha: I am glad YP Singh is managing to go to the depth of the matter and bringing everyone under the gambit. Btw wrong interpretation and quotation of law is not way of getting to the depth. We will see how things go.
Crookbond Posted October 18, 2012 Posted October 18, 2012 You didnt read the judgement. The public auction is mandatory only after the government has determined that there is no other public purpose for which the land can be used. Allotting the land to a non profit NGO can be construed as public purpose. Only if there is no public purpose for the land, should it be auctioned and the proceeds be used. The sale back to the original owners of the land is prohibited according to the SC. Hence the allotment is not illegal. A case can be made out for collusion since the allotment was done just within 4 days but not about the legality of the allotment of unused land to the NGO as was a point in one of your earlier post. That comes under the discretion of the government You have a point there. But let us look into it completely and understand what's going on. The law you state is from 1997. However, let me quote Order No JAY1097/(309/97) dated 6 April 2005 by the Maharashtra government : Irrigation Development Corporations should not lease or rent any additional land that has been with them for a prolonged period of time to private organizations. As per their rules no 19(2)(A) and no 28, made when the irrigation corporations were founded, it was stated that neither buildings nor land should not be rented, leased or sold to private organizations. Clearly, allocation of land to Gadkari's trust is violated by this. However, this does not stop here - the Department Secretary raised this issue but was overruled. There can not be a more damning example of illegality in terms of allotment of land as well as collusion.
Crookbond Posted October 18, 2012 Posted October 18, 2012 Yeah Kejriwal never did that :haha: I am glad YP Singh is managing to go to the depth of the matter and bringing everyone under the gambit. Btw wrong interpretation and quotation of law is not way of getting to the depth. We will see how things go. Read post # 109. Pawned! :hysterical:
Crookbond Posted October 18, 2012 Posted October 18, 2012 In fact, there is now even proof of letters written from Ghadge on 6 June 2008 to the local MLA plus Irrigation Department stating that they have made a request to return the land back to them citing the 1984 Government Directive. Also, not only where they land owners they were tilling the land since 1982 way before the 1984 Directive was passed. Weakens defence even further.
ravishingravi Posted October 18, 2012 Posted October 18, 2012 Dexter, stop jumping the gun. Your enthusiasm is admirable but this thread only substantiates that all of the discussion in last week has been by and muck slander and dirth of facts / evidences. If India needs to take this beyond debates on ICF, they i.e activists have to approach the court of law eventually. We all want politicians who are corrupt to be brought to justice irrespective of their leanings. All of us in India are effected by corruption be it BJP / Kangress / SP etc led govt. Slander on TV will have impact for 1 or 2 days. A week at most. All the allegations should be taken to the court of law just like Swamy did. It is a painful process but it is most likely to yield results. I want to see RTI activist including Kejriwal do the exposes on TV and generate discussions, but it is ironic that same people who want to re-inforce the foundations of democracy do not want approach one of the pillars of it, coz "it takes too long". But they do seem to provide a lot of fodder for keyboard ninjas :winky:
seedhi Posted October 18, 2012 Posted October 18, 2012 I fail to see any illegality done by Mr Gadkari. It wasnt if he misrepresented or lied or did any financial impropriety. He personally did not get any land, it was a cooperative which got it. That too only on a lease of 11 years. The govt can anytime cancel the lease if it wants to. Whether the rules were broken is also unclear - the govt always has the authority to give the land on lease for public benefit.
ravishingravi Posted October 18, 2012 Posted October 18, 2012 I fail to see any illegality done by Mr Gadkari. It wasnt if he misrepresented or lied or did any financial impropriety. He personally did not get any land, it was a cooperative which got it. That too only on a lease of 11 years. The govt can anytime cancel the lease if it wants to. Whether the rules were broken is also unclear - the govt always has the authority to give the land on lease for public benefit. Unethical it certainly is. When company makes a profit of Rs. 20 crores and there are farmer suicides in the state, you are not a social entrepreneur no more.
CG Posted October 18, 2012 Posted October 18, 2012 "Mumbai: Arvind Kejriwal has concealed information about a massive scam in Maharashtra because he is selective about which politicians he targets - that's the allegation made today by YP Singh, a former senior police officer who now works as an activist" http://www.ndtv.com/article/india/highlights-sharad-pawar-is-centre-of-real-scam-says-activist-yp-singh-281496 :hysterical::hysterical: .What stopped mr ypsingh to do so earlier.
ravishingravi Posted October 18, 2012 Posted October 18, 2012 Last thing Gadkari needed :haha: Pawar defends Gadkari
ravishingravi Posted October 18, 2012 Posted October 18, 2012 :hysterical::hysterical: .What stopped mr ypsingh to do so earlier. Fair point considering considering both of them were in Citizen's committee in 2009 overlooking irrigation scam and lavassa project. I ll have to fact check this. His point is, he has given all facts to Kejriwal. But he went ahead with Gadkari narrative.
seedhi Posted October 18, 2012 Posted October 18, 2012 Unethical it certainly is. When company makes a profit of Rs. 20 crores and there are farmer suicides in the state' date=' you are not a social entrepreneur no more.[/quote']I believe it is a cooperative company. Gadkari is not a major shareholder. Also, I believe that this particular area is not a suicide prone part of Maharashtra.
asterix Posted October 18, 2012 Posted October 18, 2012 Fair point considering considering both of them were in Citizen's committee in 2009 overlooking irrigation scam and lavassa project. I ll have to fact check this. His point is, he has given all facts to Kejriwal. But he went ahead with Gadkari narrative. Maybe Kejri kept them to release the info slowly.. See, Kerji has to keep some balance. He cannot go all out EXPOSING Congress and UPA allies... People should've some patience. The Courts have to be more proactive like they were in 2G case (and then dunno what happened, the courts are now taking it easy after granting bails to everybody)... Atleast take suo moto cognisance of these new cases and take it to the 'giving bail' stage (when the money changes hands to the Judges)...
ravishingravi Posted October 18, 2012 Posted October 18, 2012 I believe it is a cooperative company. Gadkari is not a major shareholder. Also' date=' I believe that this particular area is not a suicide prone part of Maharashtra.[/quote'] Seedhi, check how much time it took for him to get the approval. 4 days I believe. Yes, 4 days. There is little doubt that cronyism at work here. There is no legal case against him, to my knowledge and understanding.
Recommended Posts