The Pimpri-Chinchwad Municipal Corporation has suspended executive engineer Vijay Sonawane and sub-engineer Ashok More over discrepancies in mitigation fees charged for occupancy certificates for residential and commercial buildings in Punawale, according to a report by Loksatta – Pune.
Municipal commissioner Vijay Suryawanshi ordered the suspensions and directed the General Administration Department to begin departmental inquiries against both officials. The department has also been instructed to issue charge-sheets within 15 days.
The action followed a complaint by former Bharatiya Janata Party deputy mayor and corporator Tushar Hinge to Chief Minister Devendra Fadnavis. The complaint alleged financial irregularities and corruption in the municipal building-permission department. The chief minister subsequently directed the municipal commissioner to conduct an immediate inquiry.
The reported discrepancy relates to the amounts recorded in forms ‘A’ and ‘B’ for mitigation fees payable in connection with occupancy certificates. The buildings concerned had received construction permissions, but the fee amounts shown in the two forms were reportedly inconsistent. The corporation sought explanations from Sonawane and More after the discrepancy was identified.
According to the report, the explanations submitted by the two officials were found unsatisfactory by the department head. The suspension order cites an alleged breach of provisions under Rule 3(1)(one), (two) and (three) of the Maharashtra Civil Services (Conduct) Rules, 1979. The departmental inquiry will determine the specific responsibility of the officials.
The case places attention on the administrative processes that connect building permissions, fee assessment and occupancy certificates. These approvals are critical to the legal use of completed buildings, while discrepancies in payable charges can affect developers, commercial establishments and homebuyers waiting for occupancy documentation.
Hinge’s complaint also made broader allegations about the functioning of the building-permission department. It claimed that officials deliberately raised technical objections, deficiencies and documentation issues in applications submitted for approval, resulting in delays and alleged financial and mental harassment. The complaint further alleged that changes to original layouts or roads, references to reserved land and the creation of legal obstacles were being used improperly during the approval process.
Those broader allegations are now part of the inquiry ordered by the chief minister and municipal commissioner. The available report does not establish whether the allegations beyond the Punawale fee discrepancy have been proven, or whether further officials will face disciplinary action.
The immediate procedural milestone is the submission of charge-sheets within 15 days, followed by the departmental inquiry against the suspended officials. The corporation’s findings will determine whether the fee discrepancy resulted from an administrative error, a violation of service rules or other conduct established during the proceedings.
