State assembly speaker Dilip Walse-Patil has accepted a petition submitted by residents of Dhantoli on the Nazul problem. They had pointed out the problems faced by Nazul plot owners in lease renewal, transfer and change of name.
South-West Nagpur MLA Devendra Fadnavis had presented it to Walse-Patil in the House, who sent it to a legislative petition committee. Such committees are headed by deputy speaker and comprise MLAs and concerned officers.
Fadnavis told the speaker that large number of people living in cities of Vidarbha are Nazul lease holders. The leases had to be renewed every 30 years. In last few years the government had made some unreasonable changes and increased the annual rent as a result of which leases of 60,000 plots had not been renewed.
In Nagpur, lease of over 11,000 plots in Ramdaspeth, Dharampeth, Dhantoli, etc had not been renewed. Residents of Dhantoli had moved the High Court against change in lease renewal conditions. The HC had ruled in their favour stating that the leases were perpetual in nature and government could not collect unearned income from the lease holders. The government, however, took a stand that as state cabinet had taken the decision only it could change.
Fadnavis further said that government in June 2007 had increased the annual rent of a plot admeasuring 250 square metre to around one lakh, which was unbearable for most plot owners. The calculations were made on the basis of ready reckoner rates and prime lending rate (PLR). The then revenue minister had stayed this GR in December 2008 on Fadnavis` request but then the government claiming that duration of the stay had expired terminated the old mechanism of lease renewal.
The government had promised in monsoon session of 2010 that it would issue new directions for renewal of Nazul leases in Nagpur and Amravati divisions. The lease holders would be asked to submit an affidavit that they would abide by the decision of HC and government in this matter. Minister of state for revenue Prakash Salunkhe had promised to sent the proposal to cabinet soon but it turned out to be one of usual promises that government does not intend to fulfil.
South-West Nagpur MLA Devendra Fadnavis had presented it to Walse-Patil in the House, who sent it to a legislative petition committee. Such committees are headed by deputy speaker and comprise MLAs and concerned officers.
Fadnavis told the speaker that large number of people living in cities of Vidarbha are Nazul lease holders. The leases had to be renewed every 30 years. In last few years the government had made some unreasonable changes and increased the annual rent as a result of which leases of 60,000 plots had not been renewed.
In Nagpur, lease of over 11,000 plots in Ramdaspeth, Dharampeth, Dhantoli, etc had not been renewed. Residents of Dhantoli had moved the High Court against change in lease renewal conditions. The HC had ruled in their favour stating that the leases were perpetual in nature and government could not collect unearned income from the lease holders. The government, however, took a stand that as state cabinet had taken the decision only it could change.
Fadnavis further said that government in June 2007 had increased the annual rent of a plot admeasuring 250 square metre to around one lakh, which was unbearable for most plot owners. The calculations were made on the basis of ready reckoner rates and prime lending rate (PLR). The then revenue minister had stayed this GR in December 2008 on Fadnavis` request but then the government claiming that duration of the stay had expired terminated the old mechanism of lease renewal.
The government had promised in monsoon session of 2010 that it would issue new directions for renewal of Nazul leases in Nagpur and Amravati divisions. The lease holders would be asked to submit an affidavit that they would abide by the decision of HC and government in this matter. Minister of state for revenue Prakash Salunkhe had promised to sent the proposal to cabinet soon but it turned out to be one of usual promises that government does not intend to fulfil.
0 comments:
Post a Comment