Give list of double house allottees from CM quota: HC to govt
- Why Germanwings flight A320 might have crashed over the French Alps
- Indian Navy surveillance aircraft crashes in Goa; two officers missing
- Section 66A: 21 individuals whose petitions changed the system
- Government is willing to compromise on land bill: Venkaiah Naidu
- A little reminder: No one in House debated Section 66A, Congress brought it and BJP backed it
Hearing a PIL challenging double or multiple allotment of flats to beneficiaries from the CM's discretionary quota, the Bombay High Court today directed the Maharashtra government to submit a list of such allottees by December 6.
A Bench headed by Justice Abhay Oka also asked the state to furnish the list to the court on Friday and to petitioner Ketan Tirodkar on Saturday while posting the matter for hearing on December 9.
The court warned that if the government did not furnish the list by the stipulated date to comply with its earlier order of April 10, 2012, then it would take action against the state for contempt of court.
Government pleader Aruna Pai said the list was ready and the government would furnish it on the next occasion.
The judges asked why such a list was not submitted although an order was passed more than a year back.
Not getting a satisfactory response, the Bench observed that if it was not placed before the court on the date fixed by the Bench, then the failure would invite contempt action.
The petitioner alleged that there were several cases where a second allotment was made to the same allottee or to the allottees' spouses or their family members.
Tirodkar, arguing in person, alleged that politicians and journalists were main beneficiaries of such allotments and that "resourceful" people were allotted flats at concessional rates from the Chief Minister's discretionary quota while the needy and common people are ignored.
Tirodkar gave examples of journalist couples, who had been allotted adjacent flats and also cited names of some politicians and their kin who were allotted flats from the CM quota.
The petitioner had annexed to the PIL a reply received under Right To Information (RTI) Act from the state government, which included names of allottees from 1989 to 2010. However, it did not contain names of double or multiple allottees.