CBI closure report has no bearing on our claim on 44% of plot: Army official

As reported earlier by The Indian Express,8A,Lothian Road (GLR survey No- 241-A) measuring 0.968 acres was held on lease for an initial period of 30 years from August 1,1946 and was renewable up to 90 years. The lease is valid up to July 31,2036.

According to 15th report of the Standing Committee on Defence presented in the Lok Sabha on April 30,2012,“The lease was granted for dwelling houses and shops. The lease rights to the land were transferred by HOR (Holder of Occupancy Rights) to M/s Kalpataru Builders,Mumbai. Kalpataru builders applied for sanction to construct commercial/ residential

accommodation.

Army authorities insisted on reservation of property on the basis of 56 per cent for commercial purpose and 44 per cent for residential purpose,with residential accommodation to be offered for married officers’ accommodation.”

Kalptaru Builders had approached the Hisgh Court against the 44 per cent reservation for Army officers’ residential accommodation and the HC in September 2005 ruled in the Army’s favour. Kalptaru Builders’ appeal in the Supreme Court was dismissed in December 2009.

In September 2006,the then Defence Estates Officer (DEO) S R Nayyar filed an affidavit in the Bombay High Court in connection with a dispute about a land on Lothian Road in Pune Camp. The affidavit brought 8A,Lothian Road back into litigation. “In 2008,M/s Kalptaru Builders filed a writ petition in the Bombay High Court to claim the said 44 per cent land. At this point,the then GOC-in-C Southern Command and later VCOAS Lt. Gen Nobel Thamburaj,is alleged to have entered into an ‘out-of-court settlement’ with M/s Kalptaru Builders,” the report states.

As reported by this paper on Friday,the CBI while filing the closure report has recommended departmental action against the Defence Estates Officer and said that the government can also take action against Thamburaj as per the rules.

The agency has said that while no illegality was found in allotment of land to the private builder,due process was not followed that can be taken up for action within the organisation.

“The case was handed over to the CBI to investigate whether money exchanged hands in the entire deal. So even if CBI has been unable to find a money-trail in the case,it could be bad administrative decision (on part of Thamburaj) that caused the builder to claim the entire part,including 44 per cent which was meant for Army officers’ residential accommodation. The builder went to court on December 19,2012,a day before the Army wanted to take the land back. Now,the case is still on,” the

official added.