Cor­po­ra­tors ques­tion ‘ad­journed’ meet­ing

HIGH DRAMA Stand­ing com­mit­tee chair­man says is­sue has been re­solved as civic com­mis­sioner has agreed to give time to meet cor­po­ra­tors

Hindustan Times ST (Mumbai) - HT Navi Mumbai Live - - NAVI - G Mo­hi­ud­din Jeddy ht­for­nav­i­mum­bai@hin­dus­tan­

There was high drama at the stand­ing com­mit­tee meet­ing of NMMC on Thurs­day, with the NCP mem­bers rush­ing to NMMC sec­re­tary de­mand­ing to know how the meet­ing was called when the chair­man Shivram Patil of the Shiv Sena, had last week ad­journed it in­def­i­nitely.

Heated ex­changes en­sued be­tween the op­po­si­tion and the NCP mem­bers be­fore the sec­re­tary could speak. Patil too then clar­i­fied the change in the de­ci­sion.

Patil had last week in­def­i­nitely ad­journed the stand­ing com­mit­tee meet­ing de­mand­ing that mu­nic­i­pal com­mis­sioner Tukaram Mundhe give spe­cific time to the cor­po­ra­tors be­fore any fur­ther res­o­lu­tions are passed.

There had been re­ports of the Shiv Sena top brass not be­ing pleased with Patil’s de­ci­sion.

As soon as the meet­ing started on Thurs­day, the NCP mem­bers led by house leader Jay­want Su­tar, rushed to­wards NMMC sec­re­tary Chi­tra Baviskar and Patil who was seated next to her de­mand­ing an ex­pla­na­tion on how the meet­ing was con­vened.

Su­tar said, “The chair­man had ad­journed it in­def­i­nitely. We need to be told how it was con­vened.”

Heated ex­changes then en­sued be­tween the NCP and op­po­si­tion mem­bers with Su­tar de­mand­ing an an­swer. Patil then asked Baviskar to give a state­ment. Baviskar said, “Fol­low­ing last week’s meet­ing, I brought to the no­tice of the chair­man that un­der MRTP Act sec­tion 35B, if the chair­man does not hold two con­sec­u­tive stand­ing com­mit­tee meet­ings,

he will be dis­qual­i­fied from his post. He will also be in­el­i­gi­ble to be elected to the post dur­ing the re­main of his ten­ure.”

Su­tar said, “It is ob­vi­ous that the chair­man doesn’t have any knowl­edge about the func­tion­ing and rules and reg­u­la­tions of the com­mit­tee. He should have con­sulted the sec­re­tary be­fore tak­ing the de­ci­sion.”

Patil said, “I agree that I do not have all knowl­edge and that Su­tar is well versed in all law. I have now learnt that the meet­ings have to be held as per law. How­ever, I do not un­der­stand why the NCP which claims to know all, of­ten did not hold meet­ings for al­most a month when

their mem­bers were chair­per­sons in the pre­vi­ous years.”

On his de­mand, Patil said, “I met the com­mis­sioner af­ter the last meet­ing and he told me that it was never his in­ten­tion to in­sult the elected rep­re­sen­ta­tives and stated that we all need to work to­gether.”

Patil said, “He said that he will soon give spe­cific time to the cor­po­ra­tors to meet him. He also stated that if any cor­po­ra­tor wants to meet him, he can call him and he will give him time. That re­solved the is­sue and hence the meet­ing is now be­ing con­ducted as usual.”

Deny­ing that there was any pres­sure on him from the party and also dis­miss­ing re­ports of no­tice be­ing sent to his ho­tel by NMMC, Patil said, “There was no pres­sure from my party. It was my de­ci­sion to ad­journ and con­duct the meet­ing. Also, I do not own any ho­tel and so there is no ques­tion of me suc­cumb­ing to any pres­sure. If any of my rel­a­tives own one, it is not an is­sue for me.”

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from India

© PressReader. All rights reserved.