PUNE: In the ongoing controversy surrounding the 40 acres of government land in Mundhwa, the District Court has cancelled the registered deed. Despite this judicial ruling, the district administration has flatly refused to withdraw its independently filed claim in court, ensuring that the legal battle over ownership continues.
Background of the Land Deal and Court Ruling
The contentious case involves 40 acres of government land in Mundhwa, which power-of-attorney holder Sheetal Tejwani had purportedly sold for INR 300 crore to Digvijay Patil, a shareholder of Amedia Company linked to MP Parth Pawar. However, Tejwani approached the District Court claiming that neither the money nor the transfer of the land was ever realized. Upholding the plea, the court cancelled the transaction deed and granted the parties the right to seek a refund of the stamp duty paid. The court also ordered that the possession of the land will remain with leaseholders and respective tenant cultivators since the transaction was never completed.
District Administration Stance and Legal Stand
Prior to the court’s verdict on the private suit, the district administration had also approached the District Court, arguing that the transaction was entirely illegal because the land belongs to the state government.
When the transaction deed was nullified in the Tejwani versus Amedia matter, both opposing parties requested the district administration to drop its separate lawsuit. However, the administration refused to back down, stating that ambiguities surrounding the absolute ownership of the land warranted keeping their official claim active.
Asserting firmly that the property belongs exclusively to the state, the administration has already forwarded a formal proposal to the state government to transfer the land officially to the Botanical Survey of India. Consequently, the district administration remains determined to present its arguments strongly in court to establish clear government ownership and prevent any future unauthorized encroachments. Legal experts note that this ongoing litigation highlights the complexities involved in protecting state-owned properties from contentious high-value private transactions, especially when power-of-attorney arrangements overlap with public land records. The district administration continues to monitor the judicial proceedings closely to ensure public interest is fully safeguarded.
