The Bombay High Court Wednesday granted eight weeks for the completion of an inquiry by the Anti-Corruption Bureau (ACB) into allegations of irregularities in granting additional FSI to a Juhu housing society by the Maharashtra Housing and Area Development Authority (MHADA). Justices A S Oka and A S Gadkari granted the time to the investigating agency while taking on record its interim report.
The FSI was granted allegedly in contravention of Development Control (DC) Rules in the year 2002. The vice-president of MHADA during this time was Uttam Khobragade.
“Accordingly we adjourn this petition till February 10, 2015. The final report shall be produced before the court by then,” said the bench.
The HC was acting on a PIL filed by Irfan Fakir Mohammed Khan who sought prosecution of persons responsible for the alleged scam. Ashok M Saraogi and Sushil Upadhyay appeared for the petitioner.
Senior officials of MHADA and state government who are members of this housing society allegedly violated the development control rules, the ACB had told the state earlier.
In 2002, an FSI of 2.4 was sanctioned, in violation of DC rules. However, MHADA had not obtained the approval of the state Urban Development Department in doing so. “In the year 2002, there was 2 FSI for the suburbs. The employees of MHADA at that time did not obtain the permission of the urban development department and increased 0.4 FSI of Grihswapna Society illegally,”stated the ACB report.
“After getting the additional FSI, around 28,000 sq ft was sold to a builder who paid Rs 2 crore to Grihswapna Society in the form of maintenance and the amount had been received by the office holders of the society,” the report further states.
Meanwhile, in the last order of October 31, the HC had expressed its surprise that though an open inquiry was permitted by the state government in this matter on November 16, 2011, the same had not yet concluded.
“Considering the nature of allegations and seriousness we must record our strong displeasure about the inaction on the part of the concerned officer in completing the open inquiry. A report on the progress of open inquiry shall be submitted by the officer on the next date in a sealed envelope,” the HC