The Ulhasnagar land lease controversy has intensified after documents alleged procedural irregularities involving a municipal land parcel leased to Virat Ambe Sports Club. The allegations include an unauthorised sub-lease, disputed signatures, revenue-sharing concerns, and registration issues. The claims have not been adjudicated by any court, and official responses from all concerned parties were not immediately available.
Ulhasnagar Land Lease Controversy: Allegations of Irregularities, Forged Signature and Illegal Sub-Lease Raise Questions
Serious allegations have emerged over the lease of a civic-owned land parcel in Ulhasnagar, with claims of financial irregularities, an alleged illegal sub-lease, forgery and misuse of public property. The matter has intensified after businessman Tarun Hiranandani disputed the authenticity of his alleged signature on a board resolution.
The Ulhasnagar land lease controversy has sparked fresh scrutiny after documents surfaced alleging significant irregularities involving a municipal land parcel owned by the Ulhasnagar Municipal Corporation (UMC). The allegations concern Virat Ambe Sports Club, GSGS Foundation, and associated entities over the use and leasing of public land.
According to documents reviewed, the allegations extend beyond financial concerns and include claims of an allegedly illegal sub-lease, non-registration of a long-term agreement, procedural violations, and an alleged forged signature. The claims have not been adjudicated by a competent court, and responses from all concerned parties were not immediately available.
The disputed property was reportedly leased to Virat Ambe Sports Club under an agreement dated 4 February 2015 for a period of 30 years. Documents indicate that UMC receives an annual lease amount of ₹6,04,999 under the arrangement, while subsequent commercial arrangements have become the focus of controversy.
Revenue-sharing arrangement draws scrutiny in Ulhasnagar land lease case
According to the documents, a supplementary agreement executed in 2026 allegedly allows Virat Ambe Sports Club to lease the premises to GSGS Foundation, which operates a school. The agreement reportedly entitles the club to receive 20 per cent of the school’s total revenue, including fee collections.
Those raising objections argue that while the municipal corporation receives an annual lease payment of approximately ₹6 lakh, the private arrangement could generate significantly higher earnings for the club through the use of publicly owned land. These claims remain subject to official verification.
Another allegation relates to the duration of the sub-lease. The original municipal lease is stated to remain valid until 2043, whereas the subsequent agreement allegedly extends occupation rights to 2055, exceeding the tenure of the principal lease by approximately 12 years.
The documents further allege that despite involving a long-term lease requiring compulsory registration under applicable laws, the agreement was only notarised instead of being formally registered. Critics claim this may have resulted in loss of government revenue, although authorities have not officially commented.
Also Read: Roshan Shah Fraud Case: Indian Student Jailed in US Over $3.7 Million Scam.
Alleged deviation from original public purpose and additional land allocation
The controversy also concerns the intended use of the municipal property. Tender documents issued in 2002 reportedly earmarked the land for a swimming pool, canteen and sports facilities. However, subsequent permissions granted in 2015 allegedly expanded permissible activities to include a school, hospital, supermarket and other commercial uses.
Documents further suggest that commercial events, including parties and exhibitions, may be permitted on the same premises during weekends, holidays and after school hours. Individuals questioning the arrangement argue that combining educational and commercial activities could raise concerns regarding student safety.
Another allegation relates to the allocation of an additional 512 square metres of open land located behind the swimming pool. According to the documents, the land was reportedly allotted for another 30 years without issuing a fresh public tender, prompting allegations of procedural irregularities and lack of transparency.
The records also allege that the revenue-sharing arrangement with the school increased from 10 per cent to 20 per cent within a short period. In addition, the school is alleged to have been required to purchase electricity generated from the club’s solar power system while simultaneously paying fixed charges to MSEB, resulting in an alleged double financial burden.
Tarun Hiranandani disputes alleged board resolution signature
The matter gained further attention after Tarun Hiranandani publicly alleged that his signature appearing on a purported Board Resolution dated 29 March 2025 had been forged. He has categorically denied attending any board meeting on that date.
According to his statement, no board meeting took place on 29 March 2025, and the signature attributed to him is allegedly fabricated. He has challenged the concerned company to produce the meeting minutes, video recording, attendance register and CCTV footage to establish that such a meeting was actually conducted.
Hiranandani has maintained that, in the absence of supporting evidence, the alleged resolution should be treated as invalid and prepared for fraudulent purposes. These allegations have not been independently verified and remain subject to investigation by the competent authorities.
The developments have intensified demands for an independent inquiry into the entire transaction. Several stakeholders have urged the Government of Maharashtra and the Anti-Corruption Bureau (ACB) to examine the allegations relating to the lease, the alleged sub-lease, procedural compliance, financial arrangements and the forgery claim. Sprouts News has sought to present the allegations as contained in the available documents while noting that the concerned authorities and entities will have the opportunity to present their responses during any official investigation or legal proceedings.
