MHADA Sold BMC Plot To Builder
A prime BMC plot of 5,564 square feet on the SV Road junction in Goregaon has gone to a developer without the civic body getting a single rupee for it. The plot was given to the developer way back in 2003 by Maharashtra Housing and Area Development Authority (MHADA), but the civic body has no record of the land being transferred. Now, a large commercial complex and residential building stands there.
In 2003, the Maharashtra Housing Area Development Authority (MHADA) entered an agreement with Sai Kripa Co-Operative Housing Society for the construction of a residential tower on CTS plot number 339 and 340 (mid-day has a copy of the document). However, only the first plot belonged to MHADA.
Plot 340 still belongs to the BMC to this day. And yet, MHADA somehow gave the builder – Asmi Developers – the land for construction of a building, allegedly without taking the approval of, or paying compensation the civic body. Real estate players pegged the cost of the said plot to be in several crore of rupees.
Interestingly, the BMC’s Estate Department responded to an RTI query, clearly stating that they have no record of the plot 340 being transferred to any government authority, society or individual. Even today, land records available with the revenue department show that plot 339 belongs to the MHADA (19,654 sq ft), while plot 340 is owned by the BMC (5,564 sq ft).
What’s more, even the developer admits that the land belongs to the BMC. Ajay Dedhia, speaking on behalf of Asmi Developers, said, “It is a huge plot. Only portion of it has been used by us. The land is still in the name of the BMC.”
He did not divulge how much of the plot he had used, nor did he answer whether he had permission to build on BMC land. Now, a massive building called Asmi Dreamz stands on the plot.
Local activist Sachin Chavan said, “The building has already been occupied by citizens. Innocent buyers must not be even aware that their building has come up on the land that actually belongs to the BMC. They should not be harassed or asked to pay penalty. Loss of revenue should be recovered from the developer and MHADA officials who handled this case.”