Governor order refusing action against Chavan questioned

December 22, 2013 03:01 pm | Updated November 16, 2021 11:05 pm IST - Mumbai

Former Maharashtra Chief Minister Ashok Chavan arrives to appear before the Adarsh Commission, in Mumbai. File photo: Vivek Bendre

Former Maharashtra Chief Minister Ashok Chavan arrives to appear before the Adarsh Commission, in Mumbai. File photo: Vivek Bendre

An application has been filed in the Bombay High Court by a former journalist questioning the order of the Maharashtra Governor refusing sanction to prosecute former Chief Minister Ashok Chavan in the Adarsh Housing Society Scam.

Ketan Tirodkar, in his application while relying on a Supreme Court order, has said that the CBI does not require sanction from the Governor to prosecute government servants in cases which are being monitored by the judiciary.

“The Supreme Court ruled that there is no requirement of sanction for the CBI under section 6-A of the Delhi Special Police Establishment Act to prosecute government servants in cases that are being monitored by the judiciary,” the application said.

It further said that the CBI’s compilation of documents submitted to the Governor for sanction to prosecute Mr. Chavan were fool proof and point out to the “faulty” decision of grant of additional FSI to the society allegedly by Mr. Chavan.

“In return, Mr. Chavan’s mother-in-law and brother of his father-in-law were allotted flats in the society,” the application claimed.

Tirodkar filed the application on Friday after Maharashtra Governor K. Sankaranarayanan refused permission to CBI to prosecute Mr. Chavan.

Mr. Chavan was accused of approving additional FSI (floor space index) to Adarsh society in exchange of two flats for his relatives. He was also charged with illegally approving as the then revenue minister the allotment of 40 per cent of the flats to civilians when the society was meant for Kargil war widows and defence personnel.

The two-member inquiry commission had in its final report indicted Mr. Chavan for alleged favouritism to the society.

“There was certainly a nexus between the acts of Chavan and benefits derived by his close relatives. The membership process clearly indicates that grant of requisite permission by Chavan was by way of quid pro quo,” the report said.

0 / 0
Sign in to unlock member-only benefits!
  • Access 10 free stories every month
  • Save stories to read later
  • Access to comment on every story
  • Sign-up/manage your newsletter subscriptions with a single click
  • Get notified by email for early access to discounts & offers on our products
Sign in

Comments

Comments have to be in English, and in full sentences. They cannot be abusive or personal. Please abide by our community guidelines for posting your comments.

We have migrated to a new commenting platform. If you are already a registered user of The Hindu and logged in, you may continue to engage with our articles. If you do not have an account please register and login to post comments. Users can access their older comments by logging into their accounts on Vuukle.