Corporators belonging to the opposition said the purpose of the PAC will not be served, as out of the total 11 members of the committee, five belong to the Sena and one to the BJP, while the opposition has only four members, including the committee's chairman (leader of opposition in the House).

Yusuf Abrahani, Samajwadi Party leader in the corporation said though the leader of opposition is chairman of the committee, he would have to work with the panel members, and the ruling combine's members would on the basis of their majority pressure him not to make certain vital information public to safeguard their party interests.

Asked why the opposition didn't object when the state government formulated the rules for the PAC, Abrahanipointed out the opposition parties didn't realise what they were up against when elections to all 13 committees took place on May 14.

Nominated member Ramesh Joshi said the ruling members will attempt to restrict any move of the chairman if the alliance is in an awkward position. The purpose of constituting the PAC was to keep a check on the ruling party, but as ruling members themselves enjoy a majority in it, the chairman won't be able to do anything without their sanction, he added.

In the previous BMC Act (which is redundant now), Joshi informed, any member of the House could prevail upon the municipal commissioner to present any file he or she required. But after the constitution of the PAC, only members of the committee have the right to ask for any file.

The PAC at the state level also has members from the ruling party in a majority, he said, but the committee's chairman acts more like a minister. If any confidential file is not provided to him, he can complain to the Cabinet. But in the BMC, thechairman will have to seek members' permission to make any information public. However, there's little the opposition can do about it now, as they have themselves nominated their members on the committee.

Meanwhile, Joshi has filed a petition in Bombay High Court challenging the constitution of all committees, saying there's no mention about it in the 74th amendment to the Constitution. He argues that the amendment recognises the Mayor-in-Council but not the panels. The case will come up for hearing on May 20.