Congress questions government on rent control

Congress on Friday alleged that the government’s intentions are not clear despite withdrawing amendment of the Maharashtra Rent Control Act, 1999. The party dared the government to instead come out with a policy granting ownership to all pagdi (rent) tenants in the state to maintain its pro-tenants image.

Mumbai Congress chief Sanjay Nirupam said, “The chief minister has said that there is a proposal from the housing department regarding amendment of Rent Control Act whereas housing minister Prakash Mehta has said that there is no such proposal of amending the Rent Control Act. This clearly shows that the BJP is playing a double game. It has no intention to withdraw the amendment and the only reason it has taken it back is because of BMC polls scheduled next year.”

The state government on Thursday announced that there will be no amendment to the Rent Control Act. It all started after the state government, earlier this month, announced amending the Act after which it would charge rent as per prevailing market rates to residential tenants living in spaces above 847 square feet and commercial tenants in spaces above 540 feet, both under the erstwhile “pagdi system”.

Congress leader Milind Deora said, “Our fight will continue till the government does not come out with an ownership policy for pagdi tenants. We will conduct a signature and awareness campaign for the Rent Control Act around the state and continue to fight for tenants.”

However, BJP MLA Raj Purohit questioned, “How does the Congress expect us to suddenly bring an ownership policy when the matter is already in the Supreme Court for the past 20 years If the Congress could not bring it in their 15 years of reign, it is very illogical for them to expect from the BJP to overnight bring about changes.”

To this, Mr Nirupam said, “We all know that the matter is in the Supreme Court but that does not mean that the government will come out with an anti-tenants’ policy. At least we, in our 15 years of power, never introduced any anti-tenant amendments.”