Widespread Encroachment Across the Capital; We Are Mere Trifles — Traders of Pandra Market Committee Offer Clarification
If encroachment has indeed occurred, why has no action been taken thus far? And if these structures merely serve as commercial necessities, why have they been officially recorded as encroachments in departmental records?
Ranchi: The controversy surrounding alleged encroachments by traders within the Pandra Agricultural Produce Market Committee continues to remain a hot topic of discussion. While the official list of encroachments gathers dust in departmental files, rumors are rife across the city that the very official who raised concerns regarding revenue losses to the Market Committee—and advocated for the removal of these encroachments—is now facing removal from the committee himself.
Meanwhile, several traders within the Market Committee flatly refuse to acknowledge these structures as encroachments. The traders argue that given the widespread, large-scale encroachment prevalent across various parts of the capital city, Ranchi, it is unfair to single out the Market Committee's small sheds and temporary structures as a major issue.
Investigating this matter, correspondents from *M Bharat 24 News Live* have been making regular visits to the Market Committee to hear the side of the traders accused of these alleged encroachments. The correspondents are visiting each shop individually to engage in direct conversation with the traders.
What Did the Traders Say?
K-105:
The shopkeeper could not be reached.
K-106 — Uday Shankar Chaudhary:
He declined to make any statement regarding the issue of encroachment.
K-107, 114-A:
The shopkeepers could not be reached.
K-116:
The shopkeeper stated that this does not constitute encroachment. He explained that the shop space is so cramped that it is impossible to sit comfortably or display goods for sale; consequently, a shed was erected to address this issue. However, he added that the administration is free to have it removed if they so desire.
K-117:
The shop owner was not present at the premises.
K-118 — Pankaj Sarraf:
He explained that due to a tree situated directly above the shop, rainwater drips continuously throughout the day during the monsoon season. A shed was installed solely for the purpose of safety and protection.
K-119 — Sunil Kumar:
He stated that he had rented a warehouse from Bijendra Singh. .
K-122 — Vikas Singhania:
He stated that the sheds have been erected to provide shelter from rain and sun, and that they do not cause any obstruction to movement.
Many Questions Still Remain
Following the statements made by the traders, this matter has garnered even greater attention. While some characterize it as a necessity, others view it as an instance of administrative negligence. The central question remains: if unauthorized construction or encroachment has indeed taken place within the Market Committee premises, why has no action been taken thus far? Conversely, if these structures merely serve a commercial necessity, why have they been officially recorded as encroachments in the departmental records?
For the time being, this issue remains the focal point of discussion within the Market Committee, and the trading community is keeping a close watch on the administration's next course of action.
