HYDERABAD: A comprehensive day-long survey by the Medak district revenue authorities on Saturday revealed that a few structures came up in assigned lands, which are in possession of Jamuna Hatcheries, owned by minister Etala Rajendar in Achampet and Hakimpet villages.
This is in sharp contrast to the minister’s claims that the assigned lands were not put to use by his hatchery and that the original assignees are in possession of the land. The Minister even dared the government to get a probe done by a sitting judge or any investigating agency.
Meanwhile, questions are being raised against the minister’s hatchery raising Rs 100 crore from Canara Bank mortgaging the Achampet lands.
Rajendar himself revealed about the bank loan given to Jamuna Hatcheries, which has paid-up capital of just Rs 10 crore. The investigation against him is likely to focus on whether assigned lands were also shown as surety.
"Of the 116 acres owned by the minister’s hatchery, 66 acres are of patta lands and the remaining 50 acres were assigned to poor in different spells," Medak collector Dr S. Harish told Deccan Chronicle. “Though there were certain discrepancies in patta lands also, we will initially focus on assigned lands as their occupation by the third parties is illegal,'' he said. The collector has submitted an interim report to Chief Secretary Somesh Kumar.
Another major discrepancy found by the officials pertains to the change of land use. All the lands were classified as ‘agriculture’ and it is mandatory for the hatchery to obtain change of land use from ‘agriculture’ to ‘non-agriculture’ by paying the requisite fees. There is no record to establish that the change of land use was done and doubts were raised over the Canara Bank processing the loan without change of land use.
Meanwhile, sources said that of the total 116 acres in possession of the hatchery, a few sheds and roads were constructed in about 20 acres, which included assigned lands. Even constructing a compound wall encompassing assigned lands attracts the provisions of Prohibition of Transfer Act 1977, a senior official pointed out.
Sources also said the minister's family members do not own much patta land in their name. There was a dispute over about 12-acre land between brothers of a family and one of them registered the land in the name of the minister’s wife and son despite prohibitory orders.
The minister's camp, however, maintained that no fault can be made out of if a person with proper documents and pattadar passbook sells land the same gets mutated in the minister's family members following due process....