Bachchan's land trouble continues

New Delhi: A Faizabad court on Tuesday reserved its judgement on a petition filed by megastar Amitabh Bachchan against an order of the Barabanki district magistrate, cancelling the transfer of some land in his name.

Barabanki district magistrate Aashish Goyal had earlier declared that the mode of transfer of the land to Bachchan was illegal and directed to lodge an FIR in the matter after some villagers complained about the transfer, stating that Bachchan was not a farmer nor is he a resident of Barabanki.

But the official was replaced within a few days and his successor Ram Shankar Sahu stayed the cancellation "till further orders".

Bachchan then approached the divisional commissioner to get the land restored in his name. In his revision suit, Bachchan had prayed to quash Goyal's order on the ground that no reasonable opportunity was given to him to present his legal position.

On Tuesday, the case came up for hearing before additional commissioner (administration) Vidya Sagar, who however reserved his order after hearing the arguments of Bachchan's counsel M B Singh.

Singh said the land in question, measuring two bigha five biswas, located in Daulatpur village under Fatehpur tehsil in Barabanki district, was entered in the name of Amitabh Bachchan following an order of consolidation officer, Barabanki, on August 10, 1993.

However, state government's counsel Surendra Raje opposed the revision application of Bachchan. Bachchan's counsel Singh also argued that since the land was in possession of the filmstar for a long time, it cannot be nullified by a simple order "without following legal procedures laid down in revenue laws of Uttar Pradesh."

He said that every Indian citizen has the right to purchase and own property anywhere in the country as per the Constitutional provisions.

The land was allotted to Bachchan by the Mulayam Singh Yadav government. Bachchan is known to be close to Yadav's confidante and Samajwadi Party General Secretary Amar Singh.

Bachchan now faces the allegation that he misrepresented facts to receive the benefit. He also reportedly used the allotment as a testimonial to establish his credentials as a farmer to buy agricultural land in Maharashtra as the state's rules do not permit anyone other than a farmer to purchase such land.