Congress alleges irregular land allotment linked to Chhattisgarh minister’s wife

India’s Congress opposition has accused the Chhattisgarh government of giving an advantageous commercial plot to a company linked to the wife of Minister Kedar Kashyap. The BJP rejected the allegation, while the Raipur Development Authority said the transfer complied with regulations and reflected environmental requirements.
India’s opposition Congress has accused the Chhattisgarh government of granting an undue benefit to a company linked to the wife of State Minister Kedar Kashyap through a land-development scheme in Raipur. Congress leaders Rakesh Gupta and Shreekumar Shankar Menon said Radhika Palace Private Limited, whose director includes Kashyap’s wife, Shanti, received a commercial plot in exchange for land they described as substantially less valuable. They said the Raipur Development Authority’s website listed a final plot of approximately 23,327 square feet.
The original land owned by the company measured about 1.33 acres and was located on a narrow road in Nalapara Basti, Kachna, according to the party. Gupta claimed the replacement plot was near Saddu Chowk on Baloda Bazar Road, beside a proposed 45-metre-wide road. He said its value could exceed ₹20 crore once road construction was completed.
Congress also alleged that the final plot was not contiguous with the original land, contrary to provisions it cited from the Chhattisgarh Town and Country Planning Act, 1973. The party demanded an investigation and Kashyap’s resignation. The minister had not responded to The Hindu’s query by the reported deadline.
The Raipur Development Authority rejected the suggestion that the allotment breached rules. Vice chairman J.P. Sharma said affected landowners had been relocated to comply with National Green Tribunal guidelines protecting water sources.
BJP spokesperson Shivnarayan Pandey also dismissed the allegations. He said the scheme allowed landowners either to receive monetary compensation or to have land developed and receive 40% of it in return. He argued that developed land could have a higher value because infrastructure was added, while questioning the valuation presented by Congress.
This independently written report is based on information supplied by the named publisher. Vertrix News has not independently verified the source report.