The Bombay high court on Saturday, while observing that there seemed exertion of “influence and clout” of the Pawar family in the development of Lavasa as a hill station in 2002, has refused to interfere with the same due to “gross delay” in the filing of the plea and considering that “third party rights have been created”.
A division bench of Chief Justice Dipankar Datta and Justice Girish Kulkarni disposed of a PIL filed by advocate Nanasaheb Jadhav seeking to declare the special permission granted by the Development Commissioner (Industries) to develop Lavasa as void, arbitrary, unreasonable, undue political favouritism, breach of trust and bad in law.
The PIL had sought quashing of the special permission granted to the Lake City Corporation to purchase lands for private hill station Lavasa.
The court has also upheld the validity of amendment to the Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Land Act, 2005, by which retrospective permissions were given for its development. Although the Act was amended in 2005, the clearance to the project was given in 2002.
NCP chief Sharad Pawar, his daughter and MP Supriya Sule and his nephew and deputy chief minister Ajit Pawar were added as respondents in the PIL. However, only Ajit Pawar filed an affidavit in reply.
Ajit Pawar was the Minister for Irrigation and ex-officio Chairman of the Maharashtra Krishna Valley Development Corporation (MKVDC) at the relevant time. He was a part of the meeting which granted clearance to the proposed dam which would aid water supply to Lavasa.
Jadhav had contended that in the absence of a rebuttal, the allegations must be deemed to have been admitted by them.
The court noted in its judgement: “… all with a view to give shape to Shri Sharad Pawar’s dream project of Lavasa -- it cannot be said that exertion of influence and clout by Shri Sharad Pawar and Smt. Supriya Sule is an unreasonable inference…”
In the absence of the “unrebutted allegations”, the court observed: “…we are left to judge the veracity of the allegations on tests of probability without anything more substantial by way of answer. Shri Sharad Pawar and Smt. Supriya Sule being personally interested in the project of the hill station, it is proved by preponderance of probability that the allegations are true.”
As far as allegations of favouritism by Ajit Pawar are concerned, the HC noted that it was his ‘solemn duty’ to disclose his personal interest in the matter.
“As the Minister for Irrigation and holder of a Constitutional office by virtue of which he was the Chairman of the MKVDC, it was the solemn duty of Shri Ajit Pawar to disclose his direct or indirect interest in the matter,” added the court.
The court also took note of the fact that no tender was issued for the same before awarding the contract.
The court noted that Jadhav has shown a “serious concern and commitment” to take up the cause “involving some powerful respondents” in his PIL. It said, however, it could not grant any relief due to delay, observing that: “… we feel that a ‘judicial hands-off’ approach is perhaps best suited in the present case having regard to the intervening delay between the alleged acts of violation of Constitutional guarantees and institution of this public interest litigation.”
The court also said that it has been almost more than a decade that Lavasa has come into existence and considering that none of the farmers had challenged it, “it would not be unreasonable to assume that they were/are happy and satisfied with whatever bargain they were able to make”.
