Click here if you would like to Contribute or send a feedback.
Click here to go to the main page of Star of Mysore. Makkaji Chowk Project is Mysore city's dream project gone awry. Politicians, bureaucrats and business interests knew it was a gold mine. Naturally, everyone had his / her finger in the pie. It became a milch cow for anyone, from the Corporation Tax Collector to its highest officer — a virtual Kamadhenu and remains one even today. Tax payers of Mysore City will continue to see this eyesore area for many years to come. We don't need an astrologer to tell us this truth. There are many small and big, legal and illegal stake - holders in Makkaji Chowk. They are: a) The land owners, b) The legal heirs of deceased land owners, c) Original tenants, d) Sub - tenants, e) Squatters, f) The Corporation, g) MUDA, h) Parties to Court cases pending and those disposed either in favour of owners or tenants, i) Tenants and the Corporation who signed a compromise agreement, to mention here. It is like a wheel within a wheel. A web difficult to untangle. The only quick - fix solution seems to lie either in a negotiated settlement between the parties concerned or a Legislation to take over the land and buildings. If one closely follows the sequence of events leading to the unanimous resolution passed by the Mysore City Corporation (MCC) Council on 10.10.2005 on the Subject No. 164, deciding to lease out the 4.19 acres of land for 40 years to Maverick Holdings and Investment Pvt. Ltd. (Promoters of Garuda Shopping Mall in Bangalore) under the Boot system on a paltry quarterly rent of Rs. 75,37, 500, it is very clear that the Makkaji Chowk is doomed to remain a rundown, ramshackle, dirty area that it is now for all time to come. At the same time, the politicians and bureaucrats will keep emptying the government treasury causing losses to the tune of crores of rupees to the Corporation's exchequer by not implementing the project or by not getting the 4.19 acres of land cleared of its legal and illegal occupants. The idea of developing Makkaji Chowk as a “City Centre Shopping Complex” with HUDCO assistance to start with, was born in sin — the sin of corruption from day one. The MUDA (then CITB), an agency to acquire the land, and the City Corporation very well knew the complex legal, economic and humanitarian problems involved in getting this project off the ground simply because there were more than 129 tenants and 50 owners of those shops. As for the tenants, none of the original tenants, except for a very few, can be found doing business in Makkaji Chowk. Large number of shops has been sub - let and the owners may not know who these new tenants are. It is significant that in the City Corporation's budget for the year 2005 - 2006, presented on March 22, 2005, Prabhumurthy, Chairman, Standing Committee on Tax, Finance and Appeals, had proposed an allocation of Rs. 15 crore for the commercial complex at Makkaji Chowk. He had said that the money would be raised with the help of the private participation under the Boot system. After this, the next time the tax - payers heard of Makkaji Chowk was on October 10, 2005, when the Council passed that infamous resolution to lease the Makkaji Chowk land to Maverick Holdings and Investments Pvt. Ltd. Surprisingly, for nearly one month nobody made any noise, nor registered any protest about that strange, unanimous resolution of the Corporation Council by the City Fathers, who are supposed to act as surrogate fathers to improve our city's financial health and development. Thanks to former Deputy Mayor and now Corporator B. Siddaraju and former MLA A. Ramdas, who blew the whistle. Star of Mysorepublished a front page report under the heading "Mod shopping mall for city under scan" on Nov. 10, quoting Siddaraju, who filed objections to the project with the Principal Secretary, Urban Development Department, Government of Karnataka and Ramdas, who called a press meet and said he would file a writ petition challenging the decision of the Corporation Council. Mired in this kind of controversy, there is very little chance of Makkaji Chowk Shopping Mall becoming a reality and worse, the 4.19 acres of land being cleared of the present legal and illegal tenants and also the old ramshackle buildings, many of them having already collapsed. It is pertinent at this point to go back in time and find out why, as long back as 1995, that is a good 10 years back, the Corporation's Finance Committee demanded a CoD probe into the Makkaji Chowk land acquisition.
In a front page report of SOM dated May 17, 1995, under the heading "Makkaji Chowk scandal: Bogus tenants, owners get compensation", M.C. Chikkanna, Chairman, Taxation and Finance Committee of City Corporation, had demanded a CoD probe into the scandal involving crores of rupees. In fact, the Committee passed a resolution on April 21, 1995, urging the Government to probe into every aspect of the Makkaji Chowk building project, saying there were several irregularities since the process began. It specifically pointed out double payment of compensation, denial of compensation to genuine owners and tenants, payment of compensation to bogus tenants, disappearance of important documents and records in this regard from the Corporation files etc. We may assume that due to the influence of politicians and bureaucrats the demand for CoD probe was ignored. Chikkanna had also alleged that the Special Land Acquisition Officer of MUDA, who conducted the acquisition proceedings for the past many years, did not maintain proper records and was also responsible for the missing of important documents. Chikkanna had said the Committee found that the Corporation paid compensation to 12 shops in the year 1994, even though the records showed they were already paid compensation along with 116 shops as long ago as 1971. That means, these 12 shops were paid compensation twice — once in 1971 and second time in 1994. He, however, did not mention the amount of compensation paid. The Committee headed by Chikkanna, in its report, alleged that S. K. Nagaraja Rao, Raghavendra Rao, Tharabai Giri and Sonia Rao had received compensation for the second time with regard to 12 shops by filing false claims. Though the Committee recommended to the Government to file criminal cases against these four alleged bogus claimants, nobody knows till date if any action has been taken in this regard. It is obvious there was a nexus between bureaucracy, business and politicians that ignored the committee's recommendation. It seems, it is very easy to cheat the Government and no doubt that is happening. It is not surprising that our Lok Ayuktha Justice N. Venkatachala, a few days ago, bemoaned that the State Government headed by the Chief Minister N. Dharam Singh is not at all taking any action against all those corrupt Government officers whom the Justice had caught red - handed in many instances. Indeed, a sign of not only bad times, also dangerous times. Chikkanna's Committee had found during enquiry that as per the Gazette Notification in 1976 and 1989, three persons namely Dwarakanatha, Shama Rao and Babu Rao were identified as the genuine owners of the property.
According to Chikkanna, "one Nagaraja Rao silenced the genuine claimants with the help of one Parthanath, a Power of Attorney holder," as reported in newspapers. These three persons had filed their claims with the Mysore Urban Development Authority (MUDA), but there are no records in MUDA even though these persons possess acknowledgements for having filed their claims. Now having said this, let us find out if there is any legal basis for the Corporation Council passing the resolution when the land itself does not belong to the Corporation as there are some who have neither received the compensation, nor handed over the possession to the Corporation. There is already a Karnataka High Court decision which says 'the scheme that has been framed by the Authority is required to be executed substantially within five years from the date of the notification issued under Section 19(1) of the Karnataka Urban Development Authority's Act of 1987 (read with the Constitution of India). This is supported by the Supreme Court's decision also under the Land Acquisition Act of 1894, Central Act, according to one of the landowners of Makkaji Chowk, G. A. Suresh Kumar. More than five years have passed since notification but the scheme has not been executed. According to Suresh Kumar, the sequence of events relating to the acquisition proceedings, negotiations, quantum of compensation and court cases about his own land in Makkaji Chowk can be stated as follows:
1) Preliminary notification was issued on 25.11.1949.
2) Final notification was issued on 9.11.1971.
3) Notice informing award of compensation was issued on 17.4.1974.
4) In this award, he was offered Rs. 9,207.83 for 313 sq. yards of land at Makkaji Chowk.
5) Objection for the award was filed on 6.5.1974.
6) Building tax was collected from him upto 2.9.1983.
This means, despite the award notice of 1974, the possession of property remained with Suresh Kumar.
7) Suresh Kumar applied for Khatha change from his father's name to his name on 20.11.1984.
8) The Khatha was changed to Suresh Kumar's name on 4.12.1984.
9) The Corporation sent a notice to Suresh Kumar asking him to pay the enhanced tax on 1.4.1985.
10) Suresh Kumar files an eviction case against his tenant in HRC 90/96, which he won.
11) The tenant filed a revision petition in 1999. However, it was withdrawn because of the new Rent Control Act.
12) Suresh Kumar filed OS 365/99 against his tenant D. Srinivas in the court of the Principal Civil Judge (Jr. Division, Mysore) which was decreed in his favour on 8.3.2002.
13) The tenant went in appeal in RA No. 115/2002 in the court of the Principal Civil Judge (Sr. Division, Mysore). The appeal was dismissed on Aug. 28, 2005.
If this is the story of G. A. Suresh Kumar, the story of another 8 claimants is different. They have filed a writ petition in the High Court and it has been admitted, it is learnt. The said writ petition No. 22202/2005 was filed on 21.9.2005 by 8 legal heirs of the original owners, their ancestors, namely S. Rama Rao, C. R. Lakshmana Rao and S. R. Gopala Rao. The shops in question are: No. 36/1 measuring 344 sq.ft; No. 36/6 measuring 145 sq.ft and No. 36/A, measuring 194. sq.ft. I also learn that another four have also filed writ petition. In 1992, the MUDA had issued a statement of individual award published below which, according to sources, was handled by a Power of Attorney holder for the parties mentioned in the table. The GPA holder in this case was said to be very good in negotiating deals and thus was not only successful in getting a good rate of compensation but also in settling it in a quick-fix manner. It almost reminds one of the infamous Classic Computer scandal involving S. Bangarappa and the then Chief Secretary J. Alexander, where the deals and payments were made in quick succession leading to suspicion about the deal. When this is the legal status of some of the owners of the Makkaji Chowk land, and there may be many such cases, how can the Corporation Council pass the above mentioned resolution is an issue to be decided by the legal luminaries and probably by the Law Courts. There are many other nitty - gritty to the Makkaji Chowk land tangle like: a) The original tenants have sub - let the premises and they too are considered as tenants under the new scheme, it is learnt.
b) Tenants have formed a Tenants Association making their own demands.
c) It is learnt that the Corporation and tenants have entered into a compromise in a case that was pending in the Court. In the compromise settlement, rent was enhanced but the landlords of Makkaji Chowk were not made a party.
d) One of the terms of the compromise is said to be an assurance by the Corporation that each of the tenants will be given a shop after the complex is constructed.
e) There are about 50 landowners and about 129 original tenants and sub - tenants.
f) See the logic or illogic of Corporation's stand: For owners, the Corporation said, "take only the award money and get lost." For tenants, Corporation said: "We give you a shop."
g) It is alleged around the year 1995 or so the Corporation had appointed one Raju (that was how the tenants knew him), an engineer, to find out how many tenants were there in Makkaji Chowk area. It is alleged, he had listed, God knows for what reason, two or more tenants for each door number. That is where the catch is now.
This Raju's list (remember Schindler's List?) was never checked by any superior officer of the Corporation. Any officer worth the name would have got this job done using his common sense, if he had any. All that he had to do was to ask the tenants named in Raju's list, to get a confirmation letter from the owners, from their landlords.
But this was not done. As a result, while a certain owner may have only two tenants, as per Raju's list, this owner would have three or more tenants. Now the problem is, if at all the Corporation wants to acquire the land of G.A. Suresh Kumar measuring 313 sq. yards, it should begin the acquisition proceedings anew by issuing fresh notification. But then the Corporation may have to pay a higher compensation as well against the Rs. 9207.83 offered in 1974, for 313 sq. yards.
The present rate of compensation claimed by the owners is said to be Rs. 5,000 for sq.ft., which means the Corporation may have to pay a compensation of Rs. 46,95,000 to Suresh Kumar for his land measuring 313 sq. yards. Whose money is it anyway for the Corporation officers? According to Suresh Kumar, even where the Corporation has already paid compensation, the possession has not been taken from the tenants and owners. As a result, these owners and tenants used the opportunity and are seeking enhancement of the compensation to the level of Rs. 5,000 and odd per sq.ft. A clear case where the people's representatives and government officers have not conducted the administration of Mysore City Corporation in a way that is efficient and financially beneficial to the citizens of Mysore. Mayor Bharathi has promised a White Paper on the Makkaji Chowk project. It is hoped the White Paper will provide information about the compensation amount paid to owners, tenants or the General Power of Attorney holders with specific dates, the receiver's name and address, the mode of payment — cheque, cash or DD — the officers who approved such payment and the officers who signed the payment documents cheque, voucher, DD etc., — so that the alleged murky transactions are made transparent for the whole world to see and for the Government to take appropriate legal action wherever necessary against the recalcitrant, irresponsible, corrupt officers (if any) who had dealt with the Makkaji Chowk project. This enquiry will also put at rest the rumour of 60 : 40 sharing ratio of the compensation amount paid (between?). Delay in settling this ratio is said to be the root cause for the delay in acquiring the land and in not properly following up such acquisition, by taking physical possession of the buildings and the land, even when there was no court case and compensation dues. Courtesy: Star of Mysore Click here if you would like to Contribute or send a feedback.
Click here to go to the main page of Star of Mysore.
|
