The affidavit was filed before a division bench of Chief Justice M B Shah and Justice Y S Jahagirdar which is looking into an allegation that the minister indulged in corrupt practices while dealing with the matter. The case involving the return of 59 hectares of government-acquired land to its original owners by Rane took a new turn when Bansal filed his affidavit saying the minister had been warned against taking such a decision.

The affidavit claimed that Chief Minister Manohar Joshi had also stayed Rane's order. The bench is hearing a public interest petition by Nashik corporator Gajanan D Shelar, which challenges the validity of Rane's order passed on October 23, 1997, and alleges the minister indulged incorrupt practices by returning the land to its erstwhile owners.

The litigation revolves around 150 hectares of land in Nashik, which was acquired by the government 39 years ago for the Maharashtra Engineering Research Institute (MERI). Some of the land's original owners last year asked the Nashik Collector to return it to them, claiming MERI had not fully utilised it.

When the collector refused, the claimants approached Rane, who recognised their claim. According to the petitioner, Rane took a mala fide decision despite objections raised by MERI, the irrigation department and the law and judiciary department.

Shelar's petition was admitted by HC during the last hearing, and status quo was ordered. Therefore, Rane's order won't come into operation until the petition is decided. The final hearing of the case will take place on November 19.

Bansal's affidavit claimed officers of the revenue and forests department had advised Rane against returning the land, saying that if an acquired agricultural plotisn't used for three years for the purpose for which it's acquired, work could be resumed by the collector. If the land has acquired non-agricultural potential (as in the present case), it shouldn't be returned to the original owners but disposed of as per Land Disposal rules.

The officials told Rane though MERI had utilised 92 hectares thus far, it still needed the remaining 59 hectares. Bansal met the minister and told him that once land is acquired for a public purpose, it can't be returned to the original owners even if it's found to be surplus. The land can be offered on a priority basis for other public purposes. If lands are returned to original claimants, it will be difficult for the government to achieve long-term public causes, Bansal claimed to have told Rane. He claimed the order was passed by Rane ``in his capacity as the quasi-judicial authority under Maharashtra Land Revenue Code, 1966.'' After asking the court to remove Bansal's name as a respondent party, his counsel P D Anklesaria askedShelar's counsel P Janardanan if he gave his consent for the deletion. But the latter said such deletion can't be allowed midway since the matter is in public interest. The court didn't pass any order in this regard today.