DNA: Mumbai: Saturday, May 19, 2012.
Gautam Chatterjee, as the officer on special duty (OSD), had suggested that the government set up a committee of experts (CoE). It later emerged that the CoE was staffed with people having vested interests in the Dharavi project.
Chatterjee, principal secretary (housing), was the OSD of the Dharavi Redevelopment Project (DRP) from 2008 to 2010. DNA reported on Friday that he and Mukesh Mehta, PMC (project management consultant), had several differences. And Chatterjee tried to defer the project repeatedly.
While he kept finding faults with Mehta, he also kept petitioning for the CoE. After his incessant requests and promise that he would get all the opponents of the DRP on board, Ashok Chavan, former chief minister, gave in. But what Chavan did not know or realise was that these people at the end would be responsible for stalling the project.
In February 2009, Chavan allowed a committee of experts (CoE) to be formed. "The CM okayed the CoE on the basis of Chatterjee's assurance," a senior bureaucrat who was in the committee of secretaries (CoS) said. The senior bureaucrat was associated with Dharavi for several years. He had even worked with Chatterjee.
Though the government was aware of the fact most people in the committee were against the Dharavi project, it still went ahead with the CoE. Chavan never questioned why there was no one from Dharavi or why the names of local elected representatives or that of the PMC were not included in the list.
The controversy surrounding this committee runs deeper. RTI (Right to Information) documents show T Chandrashekhar, as the OSD, in October 2007 had sent a list of 17 people for the CoE to Swadhin Kshatriya, the then principal secretary (housing), for approval.
In fact, Kshatriya had even prepared the draft GR (government resolution). But it never saw the light of day. While some say it was because Chandrashekhar resigned as the OSD to return to his home state, Andhra Pradesh, others say Chavan never liked the idea of forming a CoE. DNA has copies of the list as well as the draft GR.
Chandrashekhar's list had Mukesh Mehta, along with representatives from the area such as Eknath Gaikwad (Congress MP), Suresh Gambhir (Shiv Sena MLA) and Varsha Gaikwad (Congress MLA). Insiders say the committee was well balanced because it had the right mix of people with various backgrounds.
Prominent personalities such as Adolph Tragler of the Slum Rehabilitation Society (SRS), architects Hafeez Contractor and Charles Correa, too, were in the list. Tragler told DNA that he never knew he was supposed to be in the CoE. "But had I been taken, I would have supported the project, albeit with some modifications," he said.
Whatever be the reason, the draft GR got a silent burial once Chandrshekhar left. But when Chatterjee took over as the OSD in 2008, he promptly mooted the idea of forming a new CoE.
When DNA asked Chatterjee why he drew up a new list, he said he did not know of any list finalised by Chandrashekhar. "The present members of CoE are people who had serious reservations against the way the DRP was conceptualised. I as the OSD and thereafter the CoS, headed by the chief secretary, spoke with them to understand their viewpoint," Chatterjee said. "The government appointed them through a GR in February 2009."
The CoE has no one from Dharavi, but three people from the Society for the Promotion of Area Resource Centre (SPARC) - director Joachim Arputham and his two colleagues Sheela Patel, and Sundar Burra. DNA reported earlier in the series that IS Chahal, as the OSD, had exposed the vested interests of SPARC. In his report, Chahal had also said that the agency had tried to delay the project.
In another report, DNA showed how Arputham desperately wanted SPARC to get the survey contract. When it went to MASHAL, Arputham managed to persuade government officials to ask MASHAL to outsource a portion of the survey work to SPARC, in contravention of the agreement rules. Various government reports and correspondence show that SPARC had carried out illegal work in the name of DRP.
Apart from them, there is an architect couple - Arvind and Nira Adarkar - in the list. "Can a committee with such people ever have a neutral approach?" Bhau Korde, social activist from Dharavi, asked. "SPARC has a vested interest in the project… Naturally, Arputham will oppose the DRP."
The CoE is supposed to give legal advice but none of the people in the list is a lawyer. So, why did the government allow such a committee to be formed?
DNA has copies of several letters signed by 7-8 members of the present CoE as a group even before the committee was formed. Their contention: the DRP is not right and Mehta should be removed from the project as a consultant.
Eknath Gaikwad, who is an MP from the area, said: "Though I am from the area, they did not consider me. This is so unfair. SPARC wanted to develop one of the sectors, yet its people are in the CoE," he said.
Gaikwad even wrote to Chavan on April 4, 2010, requesting him to disband the CoE. He said a new committee with elected representatives from the area and local social workers should be formed.
Chatterjee replied to this letter on June 11, 2010. "Under the DRP, the present CoE was formed to advice government and their suggestions are very useful but are not mandatory," he said in his reply. Chatterjee had said in 2010 that local advice is always sought but "it is difficult to select a particular group of local social workers".
But is it not natural that a project on Dharavi will have some people from the area in its CoE? It is hard to believe that the OSD could not find local representatives willing to give advice for their own redevelopment.
.JPG)
.JPG)
