Showing posts with label chief minister. Show all posts
Showing posts with label chief minister. Show all posts

Saturday, August 22, 2015

Chit Fund Means in India : Few Points about Scam of Lakhs of Crores



“Why Government is not nabbing all the directors of errant companies, who fled away with poor people’s hard earn money?  They all should be behind the bars first, same as in the case of Sahara India, then start recovery process.” Virendra Pandey, Chief Promotor, Yuva Shakti Pratishthan

Mr. Virendra Pandey : A Crusader To Stop The Chit Fund Menace  

Mr. Virendra Pandey wrote an article, in which he is questioning to the government for recovery of poor citizen’s money looted by the chit fund companies of India. He emphasis on size of the scam not only in the financial aspects but huge hawala transactions and black money generated and stashed abroad. He also says that government should form an SIT and investigate this scam. Here is the full article:

Illegal CIS Menace
I have come to know that general public and small / medium investors invested their hard earned money in various “quick earn and quick make rich schemes” with higher returns and various incentive promised by companies for promoting products / services wherein a person has to become a member / agent or in other words buy a product to become an agent (interpreted by different names by different companies) and make more members under them and sell the company’s products / services as it was sold to him for which he is offered a hefty commission and incentives thus expanding their tentacles faster and raking in money in hundreds and thousands of crores through MLM / network marketing route and promoting themselves as sale/ purchase or service provider company and circumventing the law of CIS scheme.

After receiving various complaints, I conducted a detailed investigation through our financial and legal experts in the workings and financials claims done by various companies Like PACL, SAIPRASAD GROUP, SAIPRAKASH GROUP, SAMRUDDHA JIVAN Etc. and we have come to the conclusion that there are huge financial irregularities running into thousands of crores and all the claims made by your company through the directors and agents are absolutely false baseless and frivolous.


Do PACL has 60 Lakhs 43 Thousand 388 Sq. Acras Land Bank?
We, gave them an opportunity of being heard by sending notices through our advocates, but there was no reply from them till date we started submitting our finding with law enforcement agencies and now even Security and Appellate Authority has dismissed there claim and ordered PACL TO REFUND Rs. 49,100 CRORES to the 5.85 CRORES CUSTOMERS. Therefore a question arises if the PACL has collected money from 5.85 CRORES CUSTOMERS @ 7500/- per unit then where has the money gone because as per SAT order each customer will get only Rupee 839.31 that to I doubt if the company has sufficient asset to return it. 

As per my calculations, if PACL handed over the 500 Sq. Yards land piece for Rs. 7,500 investment, and if there are 5.85 crores inventors, they must hold a land bank of approximate in the size of 29,25,00,00,000 Sq. Yards land. This is approximate 60 Lakhs 43 Thousand 388 Sq. Acras.

Tons of Questions, No Answers
I had asked how much land with clear marketable title is in possession of your company as on 31st December 2014 along with supported documents state wise.

I had asked how many plot holders do they have as on 31st December 2014 provide list State wise? Which now it is clear by the order of SAT that PACL has 5.85 crores.

PACL has collected more than Rs.40000 crores, I had asked PACL list of people from whom they had collected the amount state wise?


I had asked how many farm houses do PACL possess State wise details.

I had asked whether farm houses are operative?

I had asked why you take Power of Attorney from customer on blank paper.

I had asked why registration Letter, Allotment Letter etc. are issued on letter head of company, instead of any government letter or stamp paper?

I had pointed and demanded PACL company officials about their Auditor of your company has observed that there a discrepancies regarding title and ownership of land, requested give us complete list of such property.

I had requested the company to give us complete list of advances paid for purchase of land along with location of plot and owner/sellers/authorized persons, name to which advances have been paid.

I had asked why has PACL made investments in 100’s of companies like MDLR/ blue coast resorts etc which has no business revelation with the objectives of PACL and is nowhere mentioned in the j/v cum investment agreement of the investors/agent.

I had asked why has directors of PACL and subsidiary companies entered into 100’s of companies in which funds from PACL or its subsidiaries was infused or invested and after some time this directors got retired and went on in some other company doing the same modus-operandi, what is the status of funds which was invested into such companies as this invested funds were collected from lakhs of small and medium investors/agent from across the country in the name of j/v in property development business I shall now right to various law enforcement agencies to enquire the assets and properties of all the directors associated with PACL and its subsidiaries where they have entered and resigned.

I had asked to give us list of complete advances for purchase of land, which are doubtful in the opinion of your company auditor.

I had asked to give us list of loans and advances. Do you receive interest on such advances? Have you taken any permission for granting any such loan from the investors, if yes give us details?

I had asked Why PACL has paid commission and incentive in advance? Give us the complete list of commission and incentive paid in advances and purpose why it is given in advance? Also please provide us the copy of TDS deducted by PACL from the commissions and incentives paid.


Fooling Government and Investors in the Name Of Development of Land
I had further observed that PACL give’s service of development, maintenance, custodian caretaker of the plot which you allot to its investors/agent at a price with a guaranteed high returns thus providing your expertise as service to your clients and do any sale why you should not be termed as service provider and government should not collect service tax from you?

Why Fund Transfer to Australia?
It was further noticed by me that huge amount of funds was transferred to Australia without the permissions of the investors/agents of company thus indulging into illegal trade practice and also may be money laundering.

Where is the Land?
As per the opinion report submitted by my financial expert I doubt that the company does not have sufficient clear marketable land as it shows in the books of account and as shown that they have allotted.

Fake Land Dealing by Company
I have sufficient proof that you have indulged into fabricating of fraud property documents through your front people and office bearers to purchase fraudulently force fully properties and register properties in Raigad district by producing dummy vendor?
I think that by playing the number game of companies and rotating funds from one company to another company and further in some other company you have purpose fully tried to siphoned thousands of crores of hard earned invested funds of the investors/customers/agents and may have transferred it to Australia by illegal means.

I also found that the advances for purchase of land to the tune of Rs1484.63 crores have been paid which seems to be doubtful in nature. Please provide the necessary documents of the parties to whom the advances where paid and for which land??

In the opinion taken their financial experts they have found out that a total amount of 2892.99 crores have been invested in a shady manner my client would like to know the details of investment, name and address of parties to whom the funds were given and purpose of transaction?

Let’s end the Chit Fund menace… Let’s begin the war against financial loot by the crooks in the disguise in the corporate companies. 

Tuesday, December 10, 2013

'आदर्श से भी बड़ा है अंधेरी जमीन घोटाला!'

मुंबई: कांग्रेस के दिग्गज नेता और केंद्रीय मंत्री राजीव शुक्ला की पत्नी अनुराधा प्रसाद की संस्था को दिए गए भूखंड का मामला जोर पकड़ता जा रहा है। बीजेपी नेता किरीट सोमैया ने सोमवार को मीडिया को घोटाले से संबंधित कुछ दस्तावेज बांटे। उन्होंने इसे आदर्श घोटाले से बड़ा घोटाला करार दिया। रकम की बात की जाए तो सोमैया ने 100 करोड़ रुपये का घोटाला बताया है।

सोमवार को सोमैया ने इस मसले को एक चरण और आगे बढ़ाया। उन्होंने आरोप लगाया कि नियम कानून को तह पर रखकर कलेक्टर ने मंत्री की पत्नी की संस्था को भूखंड दिया। उन्होंने भूखंड आबंटन करने वाले कलेक्टर पर भी मामला दर्ज करने की मांग की। उन्होंने मुख्यमंत्री पृथ्वीराज चव्हाण से मांग की कि भूखंड के इस श्रीखंड का जिन-जिन अधिकारियों, नेताओं और मंत्रियों ने स्वाद लिया है उन सभी पर कार्रवाई की जाए।

सोमैया ने कहा कि जब सीएम ने विधानसभा की बैठक में मंत्रालय की जली फाइलों को फिर से बनाने की घोषणा की थी, तो फिर शुक्ला की फाइल क्यूं नहीं बनाई गई ?
साभार:
नवभारत टाइम्स | Dec 10, 2013, 04.37AM IST
http://navbharattimes.indiatimes.com/mumbai/other-news/Andheri-land-scam-is-bigger-than-Adarsh-land-scam/articleshow/27147081.cms

Thursday, December 5, 2013

Rajiv Shukla Land Scam: How school for poor was nixed to clear MP’s IB school


Five government departments, including the chief minister’s office, bent over backwards to gift two prime plots of land in Andheri worth over Rs 100 crore for less than Rs 1 lakh to a trust run by Union minister Rajiv Shukla’s wife.

Mumbai Mirror in its November 29 edition first reported how the plots near Country Club in Andheri (west) were allotted at concessional rates applicable in 1976 to BAG Films Education Society (BFES) to start a school. Shukla’s wife Anuradha Prasad is the chairman of BFES and the minister himself was its secretary till when the application for land allotment was made in 2007.

While one of the two plots was reserved for a primary municipal school and the other for a general utility playground, every rule was flouted to allot them to BFES, even though its application clearly stated that it wanted to start an IB or ICSE school. On Monday, Suburban Collector Sanjay Deshmukh and Additional Chief Secretary, revenue, Dr Swadheen S Kshatriya promised to look into the allotment that robbed the city of a municipalschoolandaplayground.“The issue has been brought to our notice after your newspaper report. We will look into it,” Kshatriya said.

This newspaper has retraced the entire paper trail between 2007, when BSEF applied for the plot, and 2008, when the allotment was made. Documents in our possession show not only did none of the government departments that dealt with the application raise any questions, the proposal was pushed through by the then chief minister late Vilasrao Deshmukh.

The BFES application travelled from the Revenue and Forest Department, which owned the land, and moved through the Urban Development, Finance and School Education departments, but does not seem to have undergone any scrutiny. Even the Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation cleared it in a jiffy, willingly sacrificing a municipal school that could have benefited hundreds of poor children in the neighbourhood.

Shukla on Monday told this newspaperthathehasspokentoChiefMinister Prithviraj Chavan and offered to return both the plots. “I have told the CM that if anything inappropriate is found in the land allotment, state shouldtakeit(theplots)back.Weanyway intended to construct a school for poor and needy residing there.”

When it was pointed out that the documents clearly show the plan was to start an IB or ICSE school, he said: “That was the plan. Eventually we decided to construct a school for poor.”

The BFES moved the application for the plot sometime in 2007 and in September the same year the divisional commissioner, who reports to the Revenue Department, cleared the allotment. His only recommendation was the Urban Development Department be consulted as the plot was reserved for a primary school. In November, the UD Department wrote back that the two plots could be allotted to BFES after seeking a nod from the BMC. Having received the green signal from the UD Department, the Revenue Department sought details from the suburban collector’s office. While the suburban collector’s office was processing the information, BFES wrote to the state that it had entered into a JV with RIMS International, which runs schools and colleges in Mumbai and Pune. The letter said RIMS had all the clearances from the State School Education Department and was equipped to start a school.

As soon as the Revenue Department received this information, a letter was shot off to the School Education Department and the BMC, seeking their clearances. In February 2008, BMC’s chief engineer of the Development and Planning department wrote to state that they had no objection if the plot reserved for a municipal primary school was handed over to the BSEF.

In March 2008, the School Education Department too gave its nod on the rounds that RIMs was certified by them and that BSEF was a financially healthy.

With all concerned departments clearing the allotment of the plot meant for the school, now arose the question of the adjoining plot reserved for a sports complex. BSEF wanted to use this plot as a play ground for its school. When the revenue department sought an opinion from Sports Department, the latter offered no resistance, stating its clearance was not even required.

When the process of deciding a price for the two plots started, a letter signedbyvariousrevenueofficialswas issued in April 2008, stating that the chief minister’s secretary had issued instructions to clear the proposal urgently. It went on to state that since the cost of the land was Rs 39,000 per sq meter, concessions would have to be given after getting a nod from Finance Department.

In May, the Finance Department stated that land rates applicable in 1976 should be applied (Rs 140 per sq meter). Chief minister (Vilasrao Deshmukh) and revenue minister (Narayan Rane) soon cleared the proposal. But that was not all. The Town Planning Department suggested that the school plot could be given at 25 per cent of the rate prevailing in 1976 and playground plot at 10 per cent of the rates prevailing in 1976. It was decided that while school plot would be given on ownership basis, playground plot would be given on 15 years lease.

On September 9, 2008, the two plots were allotted to BSEF -- Rs 98,735 for the school plot and Rs 6,309 for a 15-year lease on the plot they would use as a playground.

Ashoke Pandit, convenor of Save Open Spaces, who has filed a complaint against the land allotment with the chief minister’s office said, “The entire land deal reeks of corruption. There is no municipal school or playground for public in the vicinity. BMC could have claimed both the plots and put them to good use.”
Courtesy:
Yogesh Sadhwani and Yogesh Naik mirrorfeedback@timesgroup.com
TWEETS @_MumbaiMirror
http://epaper.timesofindia.com/Default/Scripting/ArticleWin.asp?From=Archive&Source=Page&Skin=MIRRORNEW&BaseHref=MMIR/2013/12/03&PageLabel=3&EntityId=Ar00302&ViewMode=HTML

Sunday, September 22, 2013

CBI clears Mulayam in assets case


Probe Agency Cites Lack Of Sufficient Evidence For Closure
New Delhi:The CBI on Friday closed its investigation into the allegation that Samajwadi Party (SP) chief Mulayam Singh Yadav and his sons — UP chief minister Akhilesh and Prateek — possessed assets disproportionate to their known sources of income. The agency said it had got its calculations wrong while assessing the properties of the clan in 2007.

In its closure report, the probe agency admitted to making elementary mistakes six years ago, and cited lack of sufficient evidence as well as new facts to justify the decision to wind down the investigation in the case that many suspected had politically hamstrung Yadav.

The self-incriminatory report drew attack from the BJP that attributed the closure of the case to a Congress-SP match-fixing. “We have to see whether the understanding which saw SP helping Congress out repeatedly stretches beyond the 2014 Lok Sabha polls,” said BJP.

The Congress stressed that the CBI was an autonomous organization as it professed aloofness from the development, which marks relief for Yadav ahead of the 2014 elections and leaves him free to pursue his post-poll options.

However, CBI director Ranjit Sinha justified the decision. “Our investigation has been very professional and transparent in all the cases including this. We are ready to face any legal scrutiny on the closure,” Sinha told the TOI.

The CBI said that they had to revise their estimate of the assets of Yadav clan following SC’s order last December, which had asked the agency to exclude the assets of Akhilesh’s wife Dimple while estimating the assets of the Yadavs.

“Examination of documents, statements of witnesses and the version of suspects during the course of further enquiry, has not brought out sufficient evidence supporting the allegation of possession of disproportionate assets, jointly or individually against Mualyam Singh and his family members,” the agency emphasized in its closure report.

Courtesy:
TIMES NEWS NETWORK
http://epaper.timesofindia.com/Default/Scripting/ArticleWin.asp?From=Archive&Source=Page&Skin=TOINEW&BaseHref=TOIM/2013/09/21&PageLabel=13&EntityId=Ar01301&ViewMode=HTML

Monday, December 17, 2012

IRRIGATION SCAM : NCP may seek judicial probe to keep SIT at bay

Mumbai: In a politically strategic move, the NCP has decided to submit a proposal for a high-level judicial probe into the multi-crore irrigation scam in the state to chief minister Prithviraj Chavan.

Although Chavan declined comment, a senior Congress minister told TOI on Sunday that the NCP had sought legal opinion on entrusting the probe to a panel set up under the Commission of Inquiry Act to end the weeklong stalemate over the scandal in both houses of the state legislature.

The minister pointed out that six public interest litigations against deputy chief minister Ajit Pawar and water resources minister Sunil Tatkare were pending before the Bombay high court, while leader of opposition Eknath Khadse is in the process of filing two more PILs on gross misuse of power and corruption in the irrigation department.

“The NCP fears that the court may order setting up of a special investigation team (SIT) or entrust the probe to the CBI as urged by the petitioners. In that event, the NCP will be at the receiving end. To avoid such a situation, the NCP itself will propose a judicial probe. If the proposal is accepted, then it will inform the court accordingly. In that event, the chances of setting up a SIT will be lower,’’ the minister said. Irrigation white paper has ‘outdated, misleading’ stats

Mumbai: Lies, damned lies and statistics.
The controversial white paper on irrigation projects produced by the state water resources ministry is littered with outdated, confusing and allegedly misleading statistics. Data pertaining to over half a dozen major projects are at least a decade old and widely differ from information submitted by the ministry to the state assembly eight months ago.

Most projects are in drought-prone Vidarbha region. A senior department official said the white paper seems to have exaggerated the irrigation potential and actual land which came under irrigation.

A detailed analysis of the two-volume report released by chief minister Prithviraj Chavan on November 29 shows old data was used to boost figures of land under irrigation.

The discrepancies are glaring, as in the case of the Wan project in Akola district of Vidarbha. The white paper boasts that the irrigated land due to this project is 14,428 hectares. It also admits that this figure is for the financial year 2003-04.

However, the programme estimate booklet presented in the budget session of the state assembly early this year,issilenton theirrigated land and shows it as ‘nil’. “Even if the figures in the white paper are correct, it is misleading to give data whichis a decadeold,’’ sources said. The department has to give updated figures every year, they added.

In the Upper Wardha project in Amravati district, the white paper shows a total irrigated area of 36,119 hectarestill2007-08.On theother hand, the programme estimates booklet pegged the figure at 31,760 hectares in 2010-11. “This is a total farce. The white paper relied on fiveyear-old data. Moreover, the figure in the estimates booklet shows a smaller area under irrigation,’’ department officials said.

The Arunavati project in Yavatmal district is another where major discrepancies have been found.

The white paper pegs the land under irrigation at 10,229 hectares, although the programme estimates booklet gives a figure of 670 hectares as on 2009-11.

Differences in expenditure figures have also been found in the Pench project in Nagpur. While the white paper saidonly Rs293 crorewas spent till March 2012, the estimates booklet pegged it at Rs 323 crore till March 2011.

The length of the right bank main canal of the Gosikhurd national irrigation project also varies in the two government documents. The white paper puts its length at 99 km while the estimates booklet shows it at 107 km. TOI had reported how the white paper claimed the quantum of landbroughtunder irrigation by the Gosikhurd project was 5,279 hectares, but the programme estimates booklet puts the figure at1,582hectares. Similarly, the white paper claimed expenditure on the Gosikhurd project was Rs 6,073 crore, but the programme estimates booklet puts the figure at Rs 6,609 crore.

Interestingly, the white paper does not reveal the actual figures of land under irrigation in western Maharashtra. It only gives the irrigation potential (where canals are ready, but water hasn’t reached fields) these projects have created.

The target irrigation potential of many projects in western Maharashtra is pegged on a lower side in the programme estimates compared to the white paper.

“If figures in the programme estimates booklet are wrong, it will be a fit case for breach of privilege in the assembly,’’ the sources said.

Courtesy:
Prafulla Marpakwar TNN
http://epaper.timesofindia.com/Default/Scripting/ArticleWin.asp?From=Archive&Source=Page&Skin=TOINEW&BaseHref=TOIM/2012/12/17&PageLabel=5&EntityId=Ar00105&DataChunk=Ar00501&ViewMode=HTML