A dispute over the diversion of approximately ₹5 crore meant for common development works in Pune Municipal Corporation’s Ward 22 has widened, with Congress corporator Rafiq Sheikh joining BJP corporators in opposing the fund reappropriation and seeking cancellation of the resolution.
Sheikh has asked Municipal Commissioner Naval Kishore Ram to cancel the decision and order an inquiry. According to the report, funds intended for development works in Ward 22, covering Kashewadi and Diasplot, were transferred to Ward 23-D, covering Ravivar Peth and Nana Peth, and placed under the control of corporator Vishal Dhanwade.
The reported transfer involves around ₹5 crore from common development works in Ward 22. The decision had already triggered opposition from BJP corporators, who objected to the action taken by the Standing Committee. Sheikh’s intervention means that corporators from both the BJP and Congress have now raised objections to the fund classification.
Sheikh has alleged that the transfer was made without taking the four corporators from the affected ward into confidence. The report states that Ward 22 had three BJP corporators and one Congress corporator, and that none of them was consulted before the decision was taken.
The dispute also concerns the procedure followed to approve the resolution. Sheikh has said that signatures of the corporators from the concerned ward should be present on a resolution involving the classification or transfer of development funds. He has alleged that the resolution was approved instead on the basis of signatures from members belonging to another ward.
On that basis, Sheikh has described the resolution as illegal and has demanded that it be withdrawn. He has also sought an inquiry into how the decision was approved and how the funds were transferred between the two wards.
The case highlights the role of ward-level elected representatives in decisions involving municipal development allocations. Although the report does not specify the individual projects attached to the ₹5 crore allocation, the dispute centres on whether funds assigned to common development works in one ward can be redirected without the consent or signatures of the representatives from that ward.
The municipal commissioner’s office is now the authority to which the cancellation and inquiry requests have been submitted. The supplied report does not state whether the commissioner has accepted the demand, ordered an inquiry, or issued a response to the objections.
