According to investigators, the alleged scheme revolved around one of the most consequential decisions in land administration: the approval of change of land use, or CLU. The Enforcement Directorate told a special court in Ahmedabad that bribes were demanded as “speed money” to fast-track applications, with rates allegedly pre-fixed at ₹5 to ₹10 per square metre depending on the nature of the proposal and the legal provisions involved.
At the centre of the case is Rajendrakumar Patel, a 2015-batch IAS officer who served as the district collector of Surendranagar in Gujarat. The agency has alleged that Patel, as collector, was the ultimate authority empowered to grant CLU approvals under colonial-era land laws still governing much of the state’s revenue administration. That authority, investigators claim, allowed him to control not just outcomes but also the pace at which files moved.
In filings before the court, the agency said more than 800 CLU applications have so far been identified where bribes were allegedly paid, generating proceeds of crime exceeding ₹10 crore — a figure it described as only a part of a larger money trail still under examination.
An Administrative Chain Under Scrutiny
The allegations extend beyond a single official. The Enforcement Directorate has described a network operating from within the collectorate itself, involving intermediaries and revenue officials who allegedly facilitated collections and ensured payments reached their intended recipients.
A deputy mamlatdar, Chandrasingh Mori, was arrested earlier in the probe, a move that was followed days later by Patel’s transfer without posting. Statements recorded under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, the agency told the court, point to a fixed sharing arrangement: 50 per cent of the total bribe amount allegedly went to the collector, 10 per cent to an intermediary, and the remainder was distributed among other officials, including a resident additional collector, a mamlatdar, and a clerk.
Patel, the agency asserted, was the “key beneficiary and final decision-maker” in the alleged racket. The court has remanded him to Enforcement Directorate custody until January 7, granting investigators time to pursue custodial interrogation.
Digital Trails and “Hisaab” Books
Unlike older corruption cases built largely on testimony, this investigation leans heavily on digital evidence. The agency told the court that mobile phones seized during the probe contained WhatsApp conversations, PDF files, and photographs that allegedly documented the maintenance of “hisaab” — informal but systematic accounts of bribe collections.
These records, investigators said, were periodically transmitted to the collector’s personal assistant. Messages retrieved from Mori’s phone, according to the agency, suggested that the network operated under direct instructions from the top.
One witness cited by investigators, Chetan Kanzaria, allegedly admitted that the prevailing rate for CLU approvals was ₹10 per square metre and claimed to have paid around ₹65 lakh in bribes to secure permissions from the Surendranagar collector’s office. Patel’s personal assistant, Jayrajsinh Zala, is alleged to have told investigators that he regularly shared details of collections with the collector and delivered the latter’s share.
Following the Money
Beyond the mechanics of bribery, the Enforcement Directorate is attempting to map how the alleged proceeds were used and concealed — a critical requirement under money laundering law. The agency told the court that while the generation of proceeds of crime had been established prima facie, the layering and integration of those funds were still being unravelled.
Investigators have pointed to financial arrangements that, they argue, indicate concealment: a flat purchased in Patel’s name in Ahmedabad, with rental income allegedly routed to his mother’s bank account, and household expenses that the agency claims were met in cash, including children’s school fees.
The case is being pursued under the Enforcement Directorate after the registration of an ECIR under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act. As the inquiry unfolds, it offers a detailed, and troubling, portrait of how discretionary power at the district level can allegedly be converted into a structured revenue stream — one logged, shared, and enforced with bureaucratic precision.
