A major controversy has erupted in Maharashtra after an “illegal” eviction notice was issued to the Botanical Survey of India (BSI) in connection with a disputed 40-acre land deal involving Parth Pawar, the son of Deputy Chief Minister Ajit Pawar.

According to officials, a suspended tehsildar, Suryakant Yeole, allegedly issued the eviction notice to the BSI, asking them to vacate land they had legally occupied for decades. The order was later declared invalid by Pune District Collector Jitendra Dudi, who termed the action “unauthorised and illegal.”

The incident comes just days after it emerged that a private company — Amadea Enterprises LLP, in which Parth Pawar is the majority partner — had purchased the land for ₹300 crore. The plot is located in Pune’s upscale Mundhwa area. However, opposition leaders have raised questions over the transaction, claiming that the market value of the land was nearly ₹1,800 crore and that the sale lacked mandatory government clearances.

The Chain of Events

Official records show that the land in question, classified as ‘Mahar Watan’ land, is historically associated with the Mahar (Scheduled Caste) community and was originally government-owned. It was first leased to the Botanical Survey of India in 1973 for research and botanical work. The lease, initially for 15 years, was extended in 1988 for another 50 years, with a nominal annual rent of Re 1.

However, on May 20, 2024, Amadea Enterprises LLP executed a sale deed for the same land, claiming to have purchased it from a group of 272 alleged hereditary landowners through their representative, Shital Tejwani.

Just six days after the sale, on May 26, the company wrote to Tehsildar Yeole requesting him to ensure that the land was vacated. Subsequently, on June 9, Yeole issued an eviction notice to the BSI, claiming that their lease had expired and citing a clause from the original agreement regarding the government’s right to “re-grant” the land.

In his notice, Yeole stated that the “original landowners had paid the occupancy price” to reclaim the property from the government and therefore the BSI should vacate immediately.

Collector’s Intervention and Inquiry

Following the eviction notice, officials from the Botanical Survey of India approached Collector Jitendra Dudi. The district administration immediately intervened, halting any further action and launching a formal inquiry into the tehsildar’s conduct.

Collector Dudi confirmed that Yeole’s notice had no legal standing, as the land continues to be government property. “The process of re-granting land to private individuals involves multiple procedural steps and approvals. None of those were followed. The eviction notice was completely illegal,” Dudi said.

He added that Yeole was influenced by claims made by the so-called ‘watandars’ (the hereditary claimants), who alleged that they had paid the government through demand drafts to reclaim the land. However, upon verification, officials found no record of such payments.

“Despite what the landowners claimed, no valid demand drafts were ever submitted. The entire eviction attempt was based on false premises,” Dudi clarified.

Further Legal Action

Yeole, who has already been suspended in another land-related case, reportedly informed the sub-divisional officer about his correspondence with the BSI on July 14, updating him about the status of the “lease termination.”

Meanwhile, authorities have confirmed that an FIR has been registered by the Pimpri Chinchwad police based on a complaint from the Inspector General of the Registrar’s Office. The FIR names Digvijay Patil, Shital Tejwani, and sub-registrar R. B. Taru (who has also been suspended) on charges of cheating and misappropriation related to the land deal.

Officials also revealed that the land transfer was executed without the mandatory clearances and that a stamp duty of ₹21 crore was waived, further raising questions about procedural irregularities.

Political Fallout and Pawar’s Response

Facing mounting criticism from opposition parties, Deputy Chief Minister Ajit Pawar has maintained that the deal has been scrapped. He said that his son Parth Pawar was unaware that the property purchased by his company belonged to the government.

However, the controversy has put the Pawar family under political scrutiny, with opposition leaders demanding a comprehensive probe into all aspects of the transaction, including the role of revenue officials.

As of now, the 40-acre plot remains in the government’s name, while investigations continue into how a government-leased property was sold to a private company and why a serving tehsildar acted to evict a central institution from it.