Bombay High Court Dismisses Plea Seeking To Reopen Case Against Alleged Irregularities In Kondhane Irrigation Project

Mumbai: The Bombay High Court has dismissed a petition filed by a self-described whistle-blower seeking a court-monitored probe into alleged irregularities in the Kondhane Irrigation Project, holding that the petitioner had no legal standing to pursue the case.

About Kondhane Dam Project

The City Industrial Development Corporation (CIDCO) is set to start work on construction of Kondhane dam on Ulhas river to meet the rapidly rising water demand of Navi Mumbai Airport Influence Notified Area (NAINA) city, the Navi Mumbai airport and neighbouring areas. Originally planned by the Konkan Irrigation Development Corporation, the dam will be constructed across the Ulhas River near Kondhane village in Karjat taluka of Raigad district.

Petition Seeking Probe

A bench of Justice Ajey Gadkari and Justice Shyam Chandak dismissed a petition by Mehboob Hasan Sayyed, 58, a social worker, seeking multiple directions, including the appointment of an independent inquiry committee headed by a retired High Court judge or a retired Principal District Judge.

Demand For Reinvestigation

He also sought a reinvestigation into a case registered by the Anti-Corruption Bureau (ACB), Thane, in 2016 concerning alleged irregularities and financial loss in the Kondhane Irrigation Project.

Challenge To Discharge Orders

Sayyed further requested that the HC call for records of the ACB special case and quash discharge orders passed by an Additional Sessions Judge in 2022, by which seven accused public servants were discharged.

Background Of ACB Case

The ACB registered the offence in 2016 following directions issued by the high court in an earlier public interest litigation concerning alleged irregularities in irrigation projects. The PIL was filed against various authorities including then Minister of Water Resources Sunil Tatkare.

Chargesheet And Discharge

After investigation, a chargesheet was filed in 2017 alleging that the accused caused a loss of Rs90.04 crore to the government exchequer. However, the special court discharged the accused after finding no legally sustainable material to frame charges.

HC Refuses Interference

Sayyed challenged this before the high court, which refused to interfere observing that Sayyed was not a party to the original PIL and had not participated in the investigation.

“Record clearly indicates that the Petitioner cannot be termed as a victim… According to us, the Petitioner has no locus-standi to file the present Petition,” the bench said on January 27. The detailed order copy was made available on Tuesday.

Also Watch:

State Did Not Appeal

The court also noted that the State — the aggrieved party — had not challenged the discharge orders. It further recorded that the petitioner neither gave a statement during investigation nor opposed the discharge before the trial court with additional material.

Court Questions Timing

“Though the Petitioner claims himself to be a ‘whistle-blower’, after the entire proceedings are over, has now approached this Court,” the judges remarked, concluding that no case for interference was made out, while dismissing the petition.

To get details on exclusive and budget-friendly property deals in Mumbai & surrounding regions, do visit: https://budgetproperties.in/