The Sacred Land Transfers — Part II

The Legal Sleight of Hand: How “Sharat Bhang” Was Engineered to Seize Wilson College Land

By Vivek Bhavsar 

X: @vivekbhavsar

In December 2023, a single paragraph buried inside a Collector’s order erased more than a century of Christian-missionary ownership in South Mumbai. The order declared Shart Bhang – breach of conditions – on the Wilson College Gymkhana property at Bhuleshwar, deleting the Canadian Presbyterian/ Scottish Mission Trust’s name and inserting the Government of Maharashtra as “holder.” Within months, the land was leased to the Jain International Organisation (JIO).

The file’s cornerstone? One line of bureaucratic shorthand: “Being Crown property vested in the Governor of Maharashtra, the lessee has no perpetual right and the Government reserves discretion to resume possession.”

That sentence became the legal engine for the entire transfer.

Inside the File: The ‘Crown Successor’ Clause

According to senior revenue officers, this phrasing originates from an internal Mantralaya template used since colonial times for re-entry notes on lapsed leases. Collectors routinely invoked the “Crown Successor” clause when an old grant’s tenure expired or the original lessor could not be traced. In practice, the same line was copy-pasted into dozens of city files — many concerning missionary or charitable estates that were never Crown freehold.

In the Wilson file, the Indian Canadian Mission / Scottish Church (UCFITA) was treated merely as a tenant. The mutation sheet lists the State as Holder B, implying ownership had automatically devolved from the Crown to the Governor under Article 294 of the Constitution. Yet no deed or revenue record proving such devolution is attached — only a typed note citing “continuing Crown tenure.”

Former Mantralaya officials concede this logic proliferated after 2016, when the Revenue Department launched a blanket review of all Mumbai leases. One officer recalls that the consolidated renewal proposal was presented before the then Revenue Minister (name withheld to avoid further controversy or misinterpretation) — but the process did not move forward. In the absence of a clear policy directive, district collectors were left to interpret legacy lease files independently. “Many simply used the Crown Successor formula,” he said off record.

By 2023, that formula had become bureaucratic habit. The Collector’s order invoked Crown succession, struck out the trust’s name, and entered the Government as holder “by virtue of inheritance.”
From there it was a short leap to a 30-year lease with JIO — now described in official memos as the “lawful lessee of Government land.”

Also Read: Part I: From Mission Land to Mandir Lease: How Maharashtra Handed a Rs 700-Crore Christian Trust Property to a Private Religious Body

The Law They Left Out

Nowhere in the order is there mention of the Bombay Public Trusts Act (1950) or the Indian Trusts Act, both of which protect endowed properties from alienation without statutory procedure.
Instead, the Collector relied solely on colonial precedents meant for military or office lands — not charitable institutions.

In effect, a pre-Independence doctrine was revived to override post-Independence law — turning a trust endowment into what the government called “reverted Crown property.”

The Missing Charity Commissioner

Under the Bombay Public Trusts Act Sections 36 and 41, any sale, lease, or transfer of trust property demands prior sanction from the Charity Commissioner.
Yet, as Adv. Vaibhav Pednekar, a lawyer familiar with the case, explains: “There is no reference to any application, sanction, or hearing under the Public Trusts Act in the Wilson Gymkhana file. The absence of this procedure renders the lease legally void and administratively indefensible. A trust’s title cannot be extinguished by executive order — it requires due process under statute.”

Mr. B. G. Bhambal, representing the trust’s side, confirms that neither the trustees nor their successors were notified before the Collector’s Sharat Bhang declaration. “The trust maintained continuous possession and upkeep of the land. We learnt of the so-called breach only after the government’s mutation entry appeared. It was a shock,” Bhambal said.

Their statements expose the deeper procedural flaw: a charitable trust treated as a defaulting tenant, without notice, hearing, or legal basis for re-entry.

The Rapid-Fire Favour

The timeline underscores the speed — and intent — behind the transaction:

• 11 Mar 2024: Maharashtra Revenue Tribunal upholds government’s right to “re-enter.”
• 16 Mar 2024: Revenue Department issues memo proposing lease to JIO.
• 11 Jul 2024: Collector formally hands over possession.
• 18 Mar 2025: Lease deed executed for 30 years.

Five days between tribunal order and lease proposal — an administrative sprint that suggests pre-meditated approval at higher levels.

The Cost of Convenience

Located near Girgaum Chowpatty, at the edge of Backbay, the 10,257 sq m Wilson Gymkhana plot is conservatively worth ₹700–₹800 crore.
Yet it was leased without auction, violating the Government Land Disposal Policy (2011) and CVC guidelines.
The annual rent fixed: a token ₹651 — less than a single Mumbai parking permit.

A senior revenue auditor called it “one of the costliest clerical errors in Mumbai’s history — except it wasn’t clerical.”

The Doctrine of Convenience

By conflating Crown succession with ownership, the State converted custodianship into proprietorship. “What began as guardianship has turned into inheritance,” remarked a retired official familiar with the lease process.

The Wilson Gymkhana case thus exposes how colonial clauses still hide in the footnotes of Maharashtra’s property administration — waiting to be invoked whenever political discretion demands legal cover.
As one constitutional expert told The News 21, “When a democratic government cites the Crown to justify possession, it isn’t succession — it’s seizure dressed as inheritance.”

Editorial Note & Disclaimer

This investigation by The News 21 Investigations Unit examines the administrative and legal processes surrounding the transfer and lease of the Wilson College Gymkhana property in Mumbai.
The report focuses solely on the actions of public authorities, the interpretation of land-lease policies, and the procedural application of the Maharashtra Land Revenue Code and the Bombay Public Trusts Act.

No allegation of wrongdoing, impropriety, or malafide intent is made against the Jain International Organisation (JIO) or any other community or faith-based group.
References to JIO in this series are confined to its status as a lessee named in official government documents.

The News 21 adheres to the highest standards of accuracy, balance, and respect for all faiths.
Any factual clarifications or documentary responses from the parties concerned will be published in full as part of our continuing coverage.

Next Installment Preview:
Part III – The Constitutional Fault-Line: When Article 294 Meets Article 300-A
(Exploring how the Crown-succession doctrine collides with modern property-rights jurisprudence in a democratic republic.)