Eight RTI Applications Led Him to Frauds, Forgery

A senior citizen was shockes when he found out that Pune Municipal Corporation can even resort to fraud and forgery to prove its point. The citizen could come to this inference using Right to Information tool. But even after unearthing this misdeeds, administration is sitting on his complaints and the enquiry has been lying in PMC filed for more than 10 months after the case was reopened by municipal commissioner in September 2007. It is lying now with additional commissioner (Special) Neelima Kerkatta, Khobragade and Dangat.

Prabhakar Vaze ,72, is fighting for last two years with the official apathy and high handedness. He is entangled in an administrative battle aroused over a construction without permission. Papers show that PMC officials have changed the documents to create an impreesion of law abiding procedure. In the process, though, there have been left too many loopholes to fill.

The story started when P. R. Vaze, a practising civil engineer who also worked in central government engineering department on a responsible position, went to US for a six month stay in 2002. When he returned around December, he was surprised to find a fifth floor construction going on their property. The property belongs to three Vaze brothers and they had consent terms fixed for any construction on their estate. According to these terms, which were dictated by Mumbai High Court, consent of all three brothers must be obtained for the construction.

When Vaze was about to approach PMC over the permission given to this construction, PMC issued to notice for this ‘illegal structure.’ As there was no action again, then PMC commissioner ordered then city engineer to do an enquiry. Instead the city engineer in his report adviced to regularise the strucutre. Even though they themselves had rejected it on the ground that it had no provision for lift. Enraged over this, Vaze complained to PMC upon which an enquiry was ordered.

The enquiry officer sought legal opinion which was given on 7.4.2007. This legal opinion referred to a rejected plan for fifth floor without provision of lift in 2001-2002. The legal cell opined that for any new construction in this property requires consent of all the three owners. The opinion also says, ‘the aggrieved P. R. Vaze had already consented for the fifth floor-reference rejected plan above.’ The Vaze demanded original copy of his consent documents refered in the opinion under RTI, he received on 19.9.2007 a set of drawings supposed to have been signed by P. R. Vaze.

As per the letter on 12.5. 2004 to the architect, all the drawings in his custody were cancelled by P. R. Vaze. The above mentioned drawing forms part of this cancelled drawings. This letter 12.5.2004 was also attached to the original complaint to commissioner dt. 19.4.2006. Therefore the stand taken by city engineer while giving his decision on 12.6.2007, that this letter was not in the custody of PMC is totally false.

In addition, the drawings received by Vaze under RTI, does not bear his siganture as mentioned by legal cell.

When it came to light that the plan for another independent construction was passed without consent by everyone and there was only one signature on the document, officials aaparently though out a plane. They managaed to get signature of the second owner on the plan. But in doing so, the officials forgot to take signature on both parts of the plan. The effect of this haste was now there are three sets of documents in PMC with one set having one siganture and second having two signatures. A third one is still to be obtained by Vaze. All the three documents bear one serial no. CC 3610/05 as also same date 17.01.06. Ironically, the arcitecht Sanjeev Oak had in his letter to PMC dated 21.4.2006 argued to grant permission to regularise fifth floor citing previous permissions with one signature, including CC 3610/05.

Vaze alleges, "Officials who conducted the first hearing conducted on 28.07.06 and the then city engineer were involved in this forgery. They had altered the document to cover up their mistake, as is evident from the documents provided by PMC. Meanwhile, they also submitted false reports regarding all this matter. Even when I approach them, they tell me contemptuously to go to the court. At my age, is it feasible to go to court. And is this a logic that theyr should commit a mistake and I should be made to suffer for it?"

Vaze is following the matter with PMC through RTI. He has filed at least eight RTI applications and all the misdeeds of officials have come to light thanks to RTI. Interestingly, the then commissioner Nitin Karir as also present one Pravinsingh Pardeshi had taken note of his arguments. While Kareer had ordered an enquiry of the case, Pardeshi last year ordered city engineer to reopen the case. But since then, nothing has happened. "I have written at least 600 pages of letters and attended four Lokshahi Dins. Commissioner himself handed my documents to city engineer. Still, nobody is serious," complained Vaze.

According to Vaze, the remedy to correct these wrongs is to revoke the plans and install a suo motu inquiry by the commissioner.
-----------------
How PMC officials Bungled

• The plan was passed without the consent of all three brothers as instructed by the Mumbai High Court.
  
• PMC officials claimed that the consent for the construction was obtained by P. R. Vaze, who complained otherwise.
  
• To hide the mistake, an attempt was made to obtain signatures of other owners.
  
• When the mistake came to light in a hearing in PMC, second set of sanctioned plan created with two signatures.
  
• After an order from PMC commissioner, officials visited the place to determine the plinth area of another building in the same estate. Officials applied wrong Development Control rules to determine the plinth area and came up with figure of 670 sq. ft. which is 1046 sq. ft.
  
• Officials claimed that P. R. Vaze had given his consent to plan whereas no consent was given by him since his signature does not appear on the drawing which were cancelled by him.
  
• City Engineer Prashant Waghmare in his report showed ignorance of a letter by which Vaze had cancelled his consent to any change in the plan of the building.

(Published in Pune Mirror on 6th June 2008)