Mumbai, March 25 (NationPress) The report from the inquiry committee regarding the Pune land transaction involving Parth Pawar, the son of the late former Deputy Chief Minister Ajit Pawar, emphasized that if the police investigation uncovers the participation of any additional parties, they too will be held accountable.

This involves Parth Pawar, who received a notarized Power of Attorney for government land from Sheetal Tejwani, which has been labeled as illegal, incorrect, and criminal.

Currently serving as a Rajya Sabha MP for the Nationalist Congress Party (NCP), which is part of Maharashtra's ruling Maha Vikas Aghadi coalition, Parth Pawar is at the center of this controversy.

The transaction relates to a significant 40 acres of land located in the Mundhwa area of Pune, adjacent to the upscale Koregaon Park. The land, valued at approximately Rs 1,800 crore, was purportedly to be sold to Amadea Enterprises LLP, where Parth Pawar is a partner, for Rs 300 crore, alongside a stamp duty exemption of Rs 21 crore.

By a resolution dated November 7, 2025, the government established an Inquiry Committee tasked with examining the irregularities in the sale of this government land.

The report, presented to the state legislature on Wednesday, was compiled by a six-member committee led by the Additional Chief Secretary (Revenue).

It indicated that a sale deed had been improperly registered for the transfer of government land, asserting that all involved parties—the sellers, buyers, and officials from the Revenue, Stamp, and Registration departments—are responsible for this serious violation.

At present, the disputed land is leased to the Botanical Survey of India (BSI) for a duration of 50 years, and the report advocates for its permanent occupancy by the BSI.

The BSI is engaged in vital projects such as ex-situ conservation centers and thematic gardens aimed at preserving and researching rare and endangered regional plant species. Strengthening these initiatives is deemed a national priority, hence the recommendation for permanent occupancy.

During the committee's inquiry, requests for the inclusion of additional accountable individuals in the registered criminal cases were received.

However, the committee clarified that its investigation was limited to civil matters, such as land revenue and lost stamp duty, thus it refrained from delving into criminal inquiries.

Concerning criminal aspects, two FIRs have been lodged at the police station, naming Sheetal Tejwani and Digvijay Amarsingh Patil in the FIR. Should the police investigation uncover any other implicated parties, they too will face accountability.

The report addressed the demand to include Parth Pawar as an accused, noting that during proceedings related to M/S Amedia Enterprises LLP, various documents—including financial balance sheets, company resolutions, partner names, and a second Power of Attorney executed by Sheetal Tejwani—were submitted.

A request was also made to initiate legal action against other partners of the firm. The committee clarified that assessing the financial condition of the firm was outside its jurisdiction and should be handled by police investigation.

The report highlighted that Tejwani had granted a notarized Power of Attorney to Parth Pawar, and executing such a document for government land is illegal and incorrect, categorizing it as a criminal issue.

FIRs have been filed against the individuals mentioned in the sale deed, and the aforementioned Power of Attorney concerning the same government land is currently under police investigation.

The report revealed that, in this case involving the sale of government land, two FIRs have been filed against Tejwani (Power of Attorney holder for Ashok Gaikwad and 271 others), Digvijay Amarsingh Patil (representing M/s Amedia Enterprises LLP), Ravindra Taru (Joint Sub-Registrar), and Suryakant Yeole (Tehsildar, Pune City). Both Taru and Yeole have been suspended, and processes for their dismissal from government service have commenced.

The committee has also recommended conducting independent, timely inquiries into other officials or employees found responsible for irregularities during the investigation, taking appropriate action against those found culpable.

Concerning this specific incident, the committee observed that an attempt was made to record a mutation entry in the revenue records based on the illegal sale deed; however, no such entry was made.

As of today, the Property Card identifies the owner as “Bombay Government” (government land), with physical possession held by the BSI under the Ministry of Environment, Forests and Climate Change, Government of India.

The committee noted that such occurrences arise from the outdated nature of government land records, emphasizing the necessity for timely updates.

Utilizing modern technology, a thorough inspection campaign should be undertaken regarding the total area of government land, the allotted areas, allottees, current encroachment statuses, and land surveys.

The committee suggested that all findings from this inspection be transparently published on the Revenue Department’s website.