Calcutta HC directs Bengal govt to file affidavit on land allotted to Sourav Ganguly
The Calcutta High Court on Friday directed the West Bengal government to file an affidavit within three weeks in connection with the state government granting 350 acres of land to former India captain Sourav Ganguly for just Re 1 to set up a factory in West Midnapore district.
IANS
Aug 9, 2024 11:49
0
Kolkata, Aug 9 (IANS) The Calcutta High Court on Friday directed the West Bengal government to file an affidavit within three weeks in connection with the state government granting 350 acres of land to former India captain Sourav Ganguly for just Re 1 to set up a factory in West Midnapore district.
In the affidavit, the state government must explain whether the land was allotted to Ganguly on lease as per the legal provisions, including the floating of a tender, noted a division bench of Justice Joymalya Bagchi and Justice Ananya Bandyopadhyay, which also put an interim stay on the use of the land for the time being.
A final decision on the land will be taken by the court, the bench noted while observing that for the sake of public faith, there is a need to review the land handover process.
The court was hearing a petition filed by chit fund entity Prayag Group claiming that 350 acres of land were given to Ganguly from a land parcel measuring 752 acres that was originally allotted to the Group by the state government to set up a film city in West Midnapore district.
In the plea, Prayag Group challenged the state government's decision to allot land to Ganguly without informing the Group. Its counsel contended that the Group has already invested Rs 2,700 crore in the proposed film city project, which came from the funds it generated through investors' money.
The high court had earlier appointed a judicial committee headed by retired Justice S.P. Talukdar to look into chit fund related cases in West Bengal. At that point in time, several properties of Prayag Group, including the 752-acre land parcel in West Midnapore, were confiscated by the state government.
The Group's counsel argued that even before the matter reached a final settlement, how could the state government give a portion of the confiscated land on lease to Ganguly for setting up a factory.
