<p>Madhya Pradesh high court Gwalior bench on Monday dealt a severe blow to the multi-billion coloniser-politician- bureaucrat nexus by rescinding former chief minister Shivraj Singh Chouhan’s pre-poll decision to regularise over 5,000 illegal residential colonies across the state.</p>.<p>Not only that, the court has also asked the Madhya Pradesh government to take action against the government officers concerned who colluded with the builders to allow the proliferation of illegal colonies. The landmark decision has come on a petition filed by a Gwalior-based lawyer Umesh Bohre.</p>.<p>The petitioner alleged that the decision to regularise illegal colonies got the Shivraj Singh Chouhan government a whopping Rs 25,000 crore from the builders lobby ahead of the Assembly election last year.</p>.<p>Former chief minister Chouhan had on May 8 last year announced in Gwalior the regularisation of all illegal colonies.</p>.<p>The petitioner said that Chuhan flagrantly violated the housing rules and regulations to woo builders and the people living in the illegal colonies with an eye on the Assembly election that was held in November last year.</p>.<p>The petitioner said that the previous government invoked section 15 A of the MP coloniser rules, 1998, to regularise illegal colonies which infringed upon the law. </p>.<p>Agreeing with the petitioner’s contention, the high court has issued notice to chief secretary and four others who were made party in the decision.</p>.<p>The court has also directed the government to act under section 292 E of MP civil corporation act against deputy collectors, tehsildars and revenue inspectors concerned who allowed colonisers to build unauthorised colonies. </p>.<p>There are 5,179 illegal colonies in Madhya Pradesh housing over 2.37 lakh families </p>.<p>Addressing a workshop related to regularization of illegal colonies at Bhopal in May last year, Chouhan had directed officials to complete the process by August 15.</p>.<p>“Rules, regulations and law are all only valid if they are for public welfare,” he added.</p>
<p>Madhya Pradesh high court Gwalior bench on Monday dealt a severe blow to the multi-billion coloniser-politician- bureaucrat nexus by rescinding former chief minister Shivraj Singh Chouhan’s pre-poll decision to regularise over 5,000 illegal residential colonies across the state.</p>.<p>Not only that, the court has also asked the Madhya Pradesh government to take action against the government officers concerned who colluded with the builders to allow the proliferation of illegal colonies. The landmark decision has come on a petition filed by a Gwalior-based lawyer Umesh Bohre.</p>.<p>The petitioner alleged that the decision to regularise illegal colonies got the Shivraj Singh Chouhan government a whopping Rs 25,000 crore from the builders lobby ahead of the Assembly election last year.</p>.<p>Former chief minister Chouhan had on May 8 last year announced in Gwalior the regularisation of all illegal colonies.</p>.<p>The petitioner said that Chuhan flagrantly violated the housing rules and regulations to woo builders and the people living in the illegal colonies with an eye on the Assembly election that was held in November last year.</p>.<p>The petitioner said that the previous government invoked section 15 A of the MP coloniser rules, 1998, to regularise illegal colonies which infringed upon the law. </p>.<p>Agreeing with the petitioner’s contention, the high court has issued notice to chief secretary and four others who were made party in the decision.</p>.<p>The court has also directed the government to act under section 292 E of MP civil corporation act against deputy collectors, tehsildars and revenue inspectors concerned who allowed colonisers to build unauthorised colonies. </p>.<p>There are 5,179 illegal colonies in Madhya Pradesh housing over 2.37 lakh families </p>.<p>Addressing a workshop related to regularization of illegal colonies at Bhopal in May last year, Chouhan had directed officials to complete the process by August 15.</p>.<p>“Rules, regulations and law are all only valid if they are for public welfare,” he added.</p>
