Document Fragment View
Fragment Information
Showing contexts for: pmay scheme in Shaikh Ansar Ahmad Md Husain vs The State Of Maharashtra on 5 October, 2021Matching Fragments
a) 155 houses constructed by the municipality required minor repairs, after such repairs they could be allotted to the original eligible beneficiaries under the provisions of G.R. dated 25.09.2018.
b) 45 houses needing major repairs to be allotted to eligible beneficiaries under the said G.R. as per the scheme.
c) 100 houses constructed at Vasant Nagar that could not be repaired were to be demolished. After preparing the new report under the PMAY, houses were to be constructed and allotted to the eligible beneficiaries under the scheme.
22. It was argued that the report stated that in terms of the government resolution dated 25.06.2007 for IHSDP, the municipality implements the project, and is tasked with the responsibility to prepare project reports, execute the tripartite MOA with DPR and to select the beneficiary. The municipality also hands over possession and discharges all responsibilities. M/s. Saya Engineers, Latur was appointed as the Project Management Consultant (PMC) and entrusted with recording works done in Measurement Book, verification of the day-to-day work and giving technical advice. There was dereliction of duties by public officials and the PMC, by not paying the contractors for the actual work done. The City Engineer too was responsible for verifying the measurements made by the PMC and had to attest it, but failed to do so in this case. The Chief Officer of the municipality, was also responsible as he failed to record his opinion before clearing the bills. The accountant’s signature was not found on the bills in the Measurement Books along with the necessary endorsement. The committee suggested that completed houses be allotted to the original eligible beneficiaries under the PMAY scheme, houses which cannot be repaired be demolished, and a new DPR under the PMAY scheme be prepared for construction of houses.
23. It is urged that in the meeting held on 22.04.2019 (comprising of the Collector Osmanabad, Chief Officer MHADA, Chief Officer Municipal Council Naldurg and others) several actions were proposed, such as technical valuation of the work done to ascertain if there were any financial irregularities; determining amount to be recovered from the responsible person(s) and action to be taken against the person(s) found responsible for irregularities; among others. In light of the report dated 03.06.2019 from the technical team, the Collector Osmanabad directed the Chief Officer, Municipal Council, Naldurg, to recover the excess amount paid to the contractors, and blacklist them from Government work, to initiate criminal prosecution against the person(s) who had committed the irregularities, and lastly allot the repairable houses as per PMAY. A compliance report was to be submitted. The Divisional Commissioner, Aurangabad by his letter dated 11.06.2019 directed the Collector to take steps for repairing houses which were in repairable condition to be allotted to the eligible beneficiaries under PMAY and to demolish houses which are not in repairable condition. A new DPR plan was to be prepared under PMAY scheme for construction of houses and their allotment to eligible persons. Counsel submitted that these facts are a matter of record, and cannot be disputed. In light of these materials, the authorities lodged the FIR, which led to initiation of criminal proceedings. No doubt, it would appear that those proceedings were prompted by the judgment, and the initiation of contempt proceedings. Yet, the question of quashing the FIR does not arise, because it is based on allegations of serious illegalities, that cannot be overlooked. Analysis and conclusions
8. I say and submit that in the light of above facts and circumstances the deponent vide its letter dated 11/06/2019 directed the Collector Osmanabad to take steps for repairing the houses which are in repairable condition and same should be allotted to the eligible persons under PMAY scheme. That houses which are not in repairable condition, by demolishing the same new DPR plan should be prepared under the PMAY scheme and the said houses should be allotted to the eligible person under the said scheme. Further directions has also been issued for lodging criminal prosecution against the persons responsible for the irregularities in implementation of the scheme. The copy of the letter dated 11/06/2019 is annexed herewith and marked as EXHIBIT “R-6". Hence this affidavit.”