The Himachal Pradesh government today ordered vesting of land purchased by AAP leader Prashant Bhushan's educational trust near Palampur, to which the trust dubbed the order as "biased and contrary to law".
Stating that the purpose for which the land was bought was not fulfilled, Kangra Deputy Commissioner-cum-District Magistrate C Palrasu ordered vesting of the prime tea garden land and directed the Tehsildar, Palampur, to take possession of the land within a month.
Terming the case as "farcical", Kumud Bhushan Education Society (KBES) described the claim that the land was not put to use for educational purposes, as totally baseless and false, and said it will challenge the order in a higher court.
"As per the provisions of Section 118(h) of Himachal Pradesh Tenancy and Land Reforms Act 1972, the land purchased by a non-agriculturist (either Himachali or non-Himachali), should be put to bonafide use within two years of registration of sale deed.
"But the land purchased by the Society at Kandbari (in Palampur) for establishing an educational institution was not put to use even after four years," Palrasu said.
Even after giving ample opportunity, the society has "no concrete evidence beyond doubt" that any educational institution is being run on the land and hence, the land will be vested and the infrastructure created on it will also be vested in the government, he added.
The Society, in a statement, asserted that Prashant Bhushan, secretary of KBES and a well known senior lawyer, had filed a PIL on a corruption case allegedly involving Chief Minister Virbhadra Singh.
Because of this, the government has raised "what seem to be unreasonable objections on the educational programmes of the society, even though the state government's Principal Secretary has himself opined in writing that the land is indeed being already used for the educational purposes that the society was given permission for".
"This case is entirely political and the order of the DC is on the behest of current Chief Minister," said Himanshu Kumar, a representative of the society.
"The order passed in the absence of any written objections clearly shows that the entire proceedings were farcical," Himanshu Kumar said.
