Permission should have been taken before making disputed site venue for G20: Mewar Prince tells PM

Jaipur: In a letter addressed to Prime Minister Narendra Modi and Union Ministers S. Jaishankar and G. Kishan Reddy, the Prince of Mewar Vishwaraj Singh said that a formal approval should have been taken before deciding on a disputed site as the venue for the G20 Sherpa meeting scheduled to take place from December 4-7.
In his letter, Vishwaraj Singh, son of the late Maharana Bhagwat Singh Mewar, said that the property of the City Palace which was made the venue is part of Hindu United Family and legal cases have been going on for years.
Hence the approval of other owners of the property should have been taken, he adds.
“My father, Maharana Mahendra Singh ji Mewar is the current head of our family and we have learnt from local newspaper reports that a meeting of the G20 is scheduled to take place in Udaipur. The venues mentioned include a number of our family properties that are all within the City Palace at Udaipur, the boundaries of which were decided after the integration of the State of Udaipur-Mewar with the Union of India.
“Please observe that the family properties have been held to be that of the Hindu United Family (HUF) by the Hon’ble District Court, Udaipur vide order of June 30, 2020, in our family’s partition suit 14/11 filed on April 22, 1983. The family’s litigation has over the years and this order specifically has been reported by the local, state and national media. The order has been stayed and is pending appeal in proceedings bearing no. 420/20 before the Hon’ble High Court of Rajasthan at Jodhpur, however orders of status quo over the entire suit properties continue.
“Please also note that the transfer and use of some of the properties by commercial and other entities has been challenged in these proceedings, while some of the properties have been accepted by all parties to have not been transferred to any entity whatsoever.
“The joint family (HUF) status of the family estate has also earlier been upheld by an order dated December 17, 1981, of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Bombay Bench ‘A’ IRA No. 459, 460, 461/JP/1979, which was never appealed against.
“The status of HUF has also been accepted by various taxation authorities and in other proceedings before the Hon’ble High Court of Rajasthan at Jodhpur. Further details can be provided, if required. My father is the ‘Karta’ of the family HUF according to Hindu Law and should the press reports be true it would be a violation of our rights as citizens of this country that such an event can be organised without any interaction with the owners.
“It is expected of those holding high offices to safeguard the dignity of the offices they represent, and the offices held by their invitees, by not associating with activities that are at the very least under adjudication and highly controversial.
“What is the message being sent to lower officials who have to ensure that court orders and other provisions of law are not violated when those above choose to flaunt their association with such acts,” the Prince adds in the letter.