Rs 100 crore Palani land sale scam: DMK leader Moorthy dares TVK minister to produce evidence

MADURAI: Challenging Energy and Law Minister R Nirmalkumar over his repeated corruption allegations against him in connection with the Registration Department, DMK leader and former Registration Minister P Moorthy on Sunday asked the minister to substantiate his claims with evidence.

Addressing a press conference in Madurai, Moorthy challenged Nirmalkumar to produce proof for the allegation that he had received a 20 per cent commission from illegal property registrations.

Substantiate allegations with proof, Moorthy challenges minister

"There are 589 Registration Offices in Tamil Nadu. Every Registration Office maintains records. If the Law Minister claims that I interfered in any registration or received a 20 per cent commission, let him produce evidence and identify the Registration Office, the officials involved, and the transaction concerned," Moorthy said.

"The only reason I am responding today is that if someone repeats a false allegation 10 times, people may begin to believe it is true. I have only one request to him – prove your allegation with evidence," he said.

TVK-led govt has no achievement to show

The DMK leader alleged that instead of explaining what the present government had achieved during its first 60 days in office, Minister Nirmalkumar was repeatedly referring to the previous five years under the DMK government and alleging that illegal registrations had taken place during that period.

"I openly state that during my five years as registration minister, I never instructed even a single Sub-Registrar to register any property in violation of the law," he claimed, adding that if there had been isolated instances of wrongdoing, departmental authorities would have taken action against the officials concerned.

Moorthy accused Nirmalkumar of making allegations against him to evade direct questions on the issue. He further alleged that the minister had spent the past 60 days holding press conferences instead of concentrating on the two departments under his charge. "He speaks about every department as though he is a shadow chief minister," he claimed.

Rs 100-crore Palani temple land sale scam

Referring to the Rs 100-crore Palani temple land registration case, Moorthy claimed that temple properties cannot legally be registered because they are listed as prohibited properties in the Registration Department's records.

The former minister claimed that the officer concerned was on leave on the day in question. He further claimed that two Sub-Registrars who had handled the matter earlier had declined to register the document and that it was registered only after another official took charge. “We welcome the CB-CID investigation into issue” he said.

Measures in place to prevent illegal registration

Explaining the process of registration, the former minister said a registration token must be generated a day in advance for registering any property and a registration could not have taken place accidentally or without officials being aware of the process.

Moorthy said the Registration Department has multiple levels of supervision, including the Sub-Registrar (SR), District Registrar (DR), Deputy Inspector General (DIG), and Additional Inspector General (AIG).

"Whether it is temple land, government land, waterbody poramboke land, Waqf Board property, or any other prohibited property, registration cannot be carried out because the government has flagged it (as prohibited) in the sub-registrar office," he said.

Moorthy cites Tirupparankundram example

Citing the Tirupparankundram temple as an example, Moorthy said even long-time occupants of temple land could not obtain ownership because the properties continued to stand in the name of the HR&CE Department.

“The entire village in front of the Tirupparankundram temple had been occupied by people who had been paying taxes and living there for 50 or 60 years. However, about five years ago, those lands were identified as belonging to the temple and were brought under the temple's ownership,” said Moorthy, adding that this demonstrated that the Registration Department did not permit the registration of temple properties.