The following information is based on the statements made by Bengal land and land reforms minister Abdur Rezzak Mollah on Tuesday. The information makes it clear that there was no adverse court order that compelled the land department to go in for an out-of-court settlement with the Vedic Village promoters

• Between 1997 and 2002, Sanjeevani Projects and other companies had been buying land in Rajarhat for the Vedic Village project

• After purchasing 10 acres, they applied for mutation at the office of the Block Land and Land Reforms Officer, Rajarhat

• Between 1997 and 2002, much of these 10 acres had been mutated in Sanjeevani’s favour

• The state government, at the behest of Mollah, conducted an inquiry and found that Sanjeevani had in its possession, in its name and in other names (benami), ceiling-surplus land

• According to the land ceiling law, the state government was empowered to conduct investigations into whether there was any benami property and hear out those against whom allegations had been made

• Hearings were held with Sanjeevani and associates. It was found that the group was in possession of 76 acres

• Law permits a company to have in its possession only up to 24 acres. So, in January 2003, 52 acres (76 acres - 24 acres) were vested (taken over) by the government

• In the same month, Sanjeevani filed a case in Calcutta High Court against the government’s move to vest 52 acres

lOn March 13, 2003, Justice Amitava Lala passed an order saying the petitioners (Sanjeevani) could not change the character of the land; he did not pass any order on whether the vesting should or shouldn’t be done. Mollah said on Tuesday that the order “did not say anything about vesting but also didn’t nullify vesting’’

• On March 27 and May 29, 2003, the state government and the private group made a joint inspection of the site, from which it was found that Justice Lala’s order had been flouted — meaning the land character had been changed by Sanjeevani by constructing on it

• On September 4, 2003, the state government moved the judiciary with the prayer that a contempt of court order be passed against Sanjeevani for having changed the land character

• On September 23, 2003, Sanjeevani made an appearance in the court of Justice Lala and apologised. According to the government, the court disposed of the case by saying that the apology was enough

• On September 24, 2003, Sanjeevani filed a writ petition in the court of Justice Jayanta Biswas — once again against the government’s vesting; the judge said the matter was not in the high court’s jurisdiction and that the petitioner may approach the Land Reforms and Tenancy Tribunal

• On September 25, 2003, Sanjeevani went to the tribunal challenging the government’s vesting of the land

• On September 30, 2003, the tribunal disposed of Sanjeevani’s petition and asked it to make an appeal to the North 24-Parganas District Land and Land Reforms Officer

• Instead, the private group moved the division bench of Calcutta High Court by filing a writ petition on November 9, 2003, against the vesting of the land

• On May 4, 2004, the land department issued an order to allow long-term lease settlements across the state of land which has either been vested after purchase or purchased unknowingly after vesting

• On May 2, 2005, Sanjeevani approached the land department saying it wouldn’t continue with the court case if the government, on the basis of the May 4, 2004, order, gave it the vested land on long-term lease. The land department agreed, paving the way for the out-of-court settlement

• Accordingly, Sanjeevani group associates Stone Mercantile applied for 13.71 acres, Zeon for 14.5 acres and Square Commerce for 15.99 acres from the government on long-term lease

• On May 11, 2005, the state government started initiating the long-term lease process for 44.27 acres for the construction of Vedic Village

• Through this process, the state government got Rs 97.36 lakh from the Vedic Village consortium