Adarsh Housing Society: When the Custodians Betray

Adarsh Housing Society: When the Custodians Betray

Major General Mrinal Suman

On 04 March 2015, the Bombay High Court dismissed Ashok Chavan’s appeal to drop his name from the list of accused in the infamous Adarsh Co-operative Housing Society case.

The society has been often in the news, and for all the wrong reasons. At times the society itself is responsible for the same. For example, it called a press conference on 20 December 2014 and tried to argue that no wrong was ever done by the society. It was a classic act of evading the real issues and misleading the environment through irrelevant statements.

The society’s assertions are based on the fact that MoD had not been able to produce documents to prove its ownership of the land in question. In its support, it quoted the reply received from the Director General Defence Estates, the custodians of the land records for MoD, admitting that it had no information/documents relating to the ownership of the land on which the building stands. The society also claims receipt of identical response from the Defence Estate Office, Mumbai in August 2014.

Even if it is conceded that MoD has not been able to produce documents to prove mutation in its name, the following facts regarding its possession cannot be disputed:-

a)   According to MoD’s submission to the Parliamentary Committee, the land had been in the possession of defence/army at least since 1941 and was a defence land under the provisions of Government of India Act 1937. It had been duly fenced and a boundary wall had been constructed with defence funds by Military Engineering Service (MES). MES could not have spent government funds unless the plot belonged to MoD.

b)  There are numerous communications on record from the state government and the revenue department confirming that the land was under the possession of the military. Not a single agency has ever disputed this fact. Interestingly, even the state government always considered it to be the defence land and never made any claims. What is more, a site inspection by Collector, Mumbai City found ‘the land enclosed by a boundary wall constructed by the Military Department.’  

c)   The land was not lying fallow or unused or abandoned. It had been put to effective use after due development. It had been converted into ‘Khukri Park’ and was duly inaugurated in October 1996. It was being extensively used by military personnel and their families. Regular maintenance was being carried out by the Area Headquarters. Hence, it was very well known to everyone that the plot was under military’s effective utilization when the request was made by the Adarsh society to the state government for its allotment in 2000.

It will be in order to recall the observations made by the Comptroller and Auditor General of India (CAG) in its report tabled in the Parliament on 09 Aug 2011. It stated, “The episode of Adarsh Co-operative Housing Society reveals how a group of select officials, placed in key posts, could subvert rules and regulations in order to grab prime government land – a public property – for personal benefit."

CAG went on to add, “The audit scrutiny of management of defence land indicated dismal performance on all aspects of land management. Apart from poor record keeping, lack of mutation of the land already in possession of the Armed Forces contributed to the mismanagement of defence land.”

It was further noted by CAG that the society had sought relaxation in different communications to different authorities on different grounds like ‘welfare of service personnel and ex-servicemen’; ‘girls hostel for wards of army officers posted in far flung areas’; ‘welfare of Kargil war heroes’ ; ‘welfare of widows of servicemen’; and ‘welfare of soldiers who have served their motherland’.

   

According to the Justice JA Patil and P Subramanian Commission report – “Adarsh is not a saga of ideal cooperation but a shameless tale of blatant violations of statutory provisions, rules and regulations. It reflects greed, nepotism and favoritism on the part of some people”.

However, the Public Accounts Committee (2013-14) put the whole issue in the correct historical perspective in its Ninety-first Report (Fifteenth Lok Sabha) – “According to the Agreement in 1958, between MoD and the then Government of Bombay, 41 Acres and 8 Guntas of defence land from Santacruz Rifle Range was transferred to the Government of Bombay for the construction of Western Express Highway on the condition that the State Government in lieu should give land, in Block VI, Colaba, Bombay failing which the State Government was to pay the market value of the land. Out of this, a piece of land measuring 3854 square meters in Block VI, Colaba was under consideration for exchange with State Government in lieu of the aforesaid Santacruz land. Though that land had been under the occupation of the Army, its ownership was not transferred in favour of MoD. Further, the claim for payment in lieu of defence land already transferred to State Government was also not finalised, indicating that the MoD did not have a proper mechanism to secure ownership of its properties.”

The Committee went on to observe that norms were flouted for wrongful appropriation of Government land to benefit some influential members of the armed forces and civilian officers, politicians and their relatives. It asked the CBI to expedite its investigation so that the law took its course expeditiously and the guilty were brought to justice.

Finally

Although the land swap deal was concluded with the state government in 1958, it was only in year 2000 (after good 42 years) that the fact of non-mutation was exploited by the interested parties. The military officials (possessors of the land) joined hands with the defence estate functionaries (record holders of MoD land) to obtain the plot for the proposed society. Incidentally, the Department of Defence Estates (DDE) has often been castigated for ‘disposing-off defence land rather than managing it’. A large number of inquiries are on currently.

According to the society’s contention, ‘mutation and not physical possession’ of the military land matters. Absurdity of the society’s logic defies common sense. As pointed out by CAG, “Many cases were noticed, where, though the land was in the possession of the Armed Forces for long, adequate efforts had not been made to get such land mutated in favour of MoD.” If that be so, every station commander will be at liberty to join hands with DDE to misappropriate all un-mutated military lands with impunity. Similarly, every store holder will be justified in selling those government stores that are not held on the ledger charge. One dreads to think of such a scenario.

The society claims that the infighting between two senior Congress leaders was the primary cause behind their travails. In addition, it blames the former Army Chief VK Singh for misleading MoD.

The promoters of the society forget that they were government officials whose sacred duty was to safeguard government assets. They were the custodian and guardians of the military land. Once the omission was detected, they should have got the land mutated in MoD’s favour rather than exploit the lacuna for personal gains. Adarsh is a classic case of the fence eating the grass.