AAP Rejects ED Claims of Sisodia, Jain Meetings With GMADA Officials, Calls Allegations Baseless
Chandigarh: A political dispute has intensified in Punjab following the Enforcement Directorate’s recent searches linked to the Greater Mohali Area Development Authority (GMADA). The ED has alleged that senior Aam Aadmi Party leaders Manish Sisodia and Satyendar Jain were regularly holding unofficial meetings with GMADA officials and were involved in discussions concerning important matters such as master plans, land acquisition and property auctions. The AAP has strongly rejected the allegations, calling them false, baseless and politically motivated.
According to the ED, its investigation and searches indicated that senior GMADA officials allegedly carried files outside the authority’s office at PUDA Bhawan for informal meetings with Satyendar Jain and his Officer on Special Duty, Amarender Jha, at a government residence in Chandigarh’s Sector 39. The agency has claimed that these meetings involved discussions on major policy decisions, including land auctions, acquisitions and compensation.
The ED has further alleged that some important decisions concerning fresh auctions and land acquisition were taken informally under Jain’s instructions. These are allegations made by the investigating agency and have been denied by the AAP.
The agency’s action is part of a wider money-laundering investigation connected to Tirupati Infra Projects Private Limited. The ED carried out search-and-survey operations at 26 premises spread across Delhi, Mohali, Chandigarh, Panchkula and Ludhiana. Locations linked to GMADA and the Punjab government’s Housing and Urban Development Department were also covered during the operation.
The ED has also alleged irregularities involving GMADA’s land bank, auctions, land acquisition and changes in land-use permissions. In its findings, the agency claimed that reserve prices for some unsold GMADA land were allegedly reduced before auctions, and it has estimated that the alleged manipulation could have resulted in losses running into thousands of crores. The agency has also flagged alleged irregularities involving compensation and the re-allotment of cancelled plots.
At the centre of the political controversy, however, is the ED’s claim regarding Sisodia and Jain. The agency has alleged that the two AAP leaders had regular unofficial interactions with GMADA officials over matters connected with the authority’s functioning.
The AAP has categorically rejected this claim. In its statement, the party said that neither Sisodia nor Jain has any role in GMADA’s projects, administration or official functioning. According to the party, their role in Punjab is political and they have no involvement in the authority’s day-to-day affairs or decision-making.
The ruling party has also questioned the legal basis and purpose of the ED operation at GMADA. AAP has argued that there is no FIR or predicate offence against GMADA itself and alleged that the central agency used an investigation involving Tirupati Infra Projects as a basis to enter the state government authority and collect its records and electronic data. The party has described the action as politically motivated and said the Punjab government would examine the matter and consider legal action if any unlawful conduct is found.
The ED, meanwhile, has maintained that its action was part of a money-laundering investigation and that the searches and surveys were conducted under the provisions of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act. The agency said its teams were collecting evidence and examining documents and electronic devices relevant to the investigation.
The operation at the GMADA headquarters lasted for more than 50 hours. According to reports, ED teams examined official documents and electronic devices and took certain material with them for further investigation. A number of senior officials remained at the premises during the scrutiny.
The Punjab government had also approached the Punjab and Haryana High Court amid allegations concerning the treatment and movement of GMADA officials during the ED operation. A court-appointed warrant officer subsequently visited the premises and spoke to the officials. The officer reported no evidence of illegal detention or undue pressure, after which the state government withdrew its petition.
The dispute has now developed into a wider political confrontation between the Punjab government and the central investigating agency. While the ED is continuing to examine alleged financial and administrative irregularities connected with GMADA and private real-estate interests, the AAP has maintained that the allegations against its leaders are unfounded and part of a politically motivated campaign.
At this stage, the claims concerning meetings between Sisodia, Jain and GMADA officials remain allegations by the ED that have been specifically denied by the AAP. The investigation and any subsequent legal proceedings will determine how the allegations are substantiated or addressed.
News source: Information for this article was gathered from a variety of reliable news outlets.
