The curious case of Yusuf Pathan’s Vadodara land and a Rs 20.5 crore question

The disputed plot, identified as plot number 90 in Town Planning Scheme 22 in the city’s Tandalja area, has now been valued at Rs 2.10 lakh per sq m. At the approved rate, the land is worth about Rs 20.5 crore. The valuation is nearly three times the rate at which the plot was proposed to be allotted to Pathan 14 years ago.

The dispute dates back to 2012 when Pathan approached the VMC seeking allotment of the land on a 99-year lease. The VMC Standing Committee and General Board approved the proposal and agreed to allot the plot at Rs 57,270 per sq m without conducting a public auction.

However, the proposal ran into trouble when it was sent to the state’s Urban Development Department for approval. In June 2014, the department rejected the allotment, holding that the land could not be transferred without following a public bidding process. The rejection effectively stalled the proposal, but the land remained fenced and under Pathan’s possession.

Issue resurfaces

The issue resurfaced in June 2024, shortly after Pathan was elected to the Lok Sabha from West Bengal’s Baharampur constituency on a TMC ticket. The BJP-controlled civic body issued him an encroachment notice, alleging unauthorised occupation of municipal land.

Pathan challenged the VMC’s action and sought recognition of his claim over the plot. In August 2025, however, the High Court upheld the state government’s decision rejecting the original allotment proposal, ruling that the Urban Development Department had acted within its powers in refusing approval to the transaction.

Hearing Pathan’s appeal against the High Court order on June 15 this year, a Division Bench headed by Chief Justice Sunita Agarwal granted him four weeks to pursue relief under a 1999 state policy that permits allotment of land to international sportspersons under certain conditions. At the same time, the Bench questioned how he had continued to occupy the land since 2014 despite the rejection of the allotment proposal and without making any payment to the civic body.

The court also indicated that compensation for unauthorised occupation of public land, if found payable, could be calculated at prevailing market rates. Against this backdrop, the VMC’s latest valuation of the land could assume significance not only for any future auction but also for determining potential recovery arising from its prolonged occupation.

Municipal officials, however, have maintained that the sportsperson policy cited by Pathan may not apply in the present case because the land belongs to the civic body rather than the state government.

“The policy does not apply to civic body plots. The state may allocate land, but such allotment cannot be imposed on the municipal corporation,” a VMC official said, adding once the General Board approves the valuation, the plot can be auctioned through a public bidding process as and when the land and estate department decides.

Of the seven plots cleared for valuation, five are reserved for public and government infrastructure projects, while two have been designated for residential use. Both residential plots are located in Tandalja. Besides Pathan’s plot, the second residential parcel — plot number 97 — measures 2,878 sq m and has been valued at Rs 1.5 lakh per sq m.

The remaining plots are earmarked for public facilities, including a neighbourhood centre in Akota and three parcels in Bhayli reserved for a bus stand, a central health centre, and a school-cum-games ground. Civic officials said plots already sought by government departments for public projects may not require auction.

TMC crisis

The land dispute has also acquired a political dimension amid the ongoing unrest within the TMC’s Lok Sabha ranks. Pathan is among the party MPs who have backed a dissident group seeking recognition as a separate bloc in Parliament, drawing criticism from sections of the party leadership.

The controversy spilled into the public domain on June 15 when National Conference MP Aga Syed Ruhullah Mehdi alleged on X that during a protest in Parliament’s Well in the Winter Session, a Muslim MP had warned Pathan that the BJP could “bulldoze” his house in Gujarat and advised him to stay away from the agitation. Ruhullah claimed that TMC MP Mahua Moitra had reassured Pathan that the Opposition would stand by him.

Responding on X, Moitra identified the MP as AIMIM chief Asaduddin Owaisi and criticised Pathan after he joined the dissident camp. “What a pity I fought for a ‘gaddar (traitor)’ with no courage and no spine. He was better off doing commentary,” she wrote.

In an apparent reference to the row, Owaisi wrote on X on Thursday, “Some UBT MPs are also looking to defect to the BJP. Maybe we should ask the two prominent MPs to tell us who ‘threatened’ these MPs to defect to the BJP? Why did the other 19 TMC MPs defect? Maybe it’ll take a month to blame someone. As the Qur’an says “Woe to every backbiter, slanderer” (104:1). Why are large-scale defections to BJP so easy? Why are all these people running away? You cannot blame one ‘prominent MP’ for all your failures.”