Another section feels big cloth traders who have leased out their premises to other merchants will loose out heavily if the relocation takes place.

Vijay Ratilal Shah, one of the traders opposing the shifting, claims that the organisation, All India Textile Complex (AITC) that is promoted by a handful of leading traders, has discussed the terms andconditions with the authorities without taking the wholesale traders into confidence. Chairman of the AITC Surendra Savai, who is also a director on the board of M/s New Piece Goods Market Ltd., a leading wholesale texile market housing more than 900 shops popularly known as Mulji Jetha market argued that shifting and relocating of the commercial markets is nothing new to the city. Savai, who is also the president of Bombay Textile Merchants Mahajan and Federation of Textile Traders Association, said the markets have been shifted earlier and without any inconvienience caused to businesses. In the past several markets including sugar, grain, oilseeds and spices have shifted to New Bombay and plans are underway to shift the high value diamond market to Bandra-Kurla complex as well, Savai said.

According to him the traders are opposed to the idea without any concrete reason when nothing has been finalised with the authorities. He said that they have held series of meetings with the authorities and will haveanother meeting with the new commissioner Ramnath Jha shortly. The terms and conditions are still being negotiated. He expressed confidence that the authorities will incorporate changes in the draft terms according to the traders' demands.

According to Shah said that including the chairman Champaklal Seth, managing director, Prassanna Shah and joint managing director Bhagwandas Shroff of M/s New Piece Goods Market Ltd. were not opposed to the idea of a new textile complex but there was plenty of room for clarifications in the manner which the deal with the authorities is conducted. The traders will lose substantially if the shifting is allowed without questioning a few moves.

The moot question is why the promoters of AITC are keen on shifting when the government has not made no new announcement regarding the construction of the complex. The government had first announced its relocation in 1983 and had offered the traders a rate of Rs 500 per square foot at the proposed site. Many traders had booked theshop at a nominal registration fee. There has been inordinate delay in providing the shops even after about 12-13 years. Many traders who had done their bookings at the first call have gone to the court and for one or the other reason stays have been ordered by the court, he claimed. In light of the stay order, is it legally possible to construct a new complex till court clears it is a matter of concern, he added. Moreover, the new negotiated rate per square feet is Rs 3,500 which is substantially high considering the slump in the real estate market. Further more there is no clarity on the area offered to each shop. The new proposal envisages alloting shops of 200 square feet but it does not mention whether the area is carpet, built-up or super-built-up. In case where the area is super built-up the traders will end-up having only 130 square-feet of usable space (as almost 35 per cent of the area in the case accounts for the passage and such other space) ending up into the same congested shop area that thetraders are presently working in.

Shah argued that according to the information available wih him, the ownership of the new market will lay with BMRDA and it will be governed by a government agency similar to APMC market at Vashi. Thus the traders who are presently free at their will. would be caged by various permissions to be obtained from the authorities at a slightest change in their establishments at the new complex. The demand registration circular clearly mentions- " The entire land in the complex belongs to B.M.R.D.A. The shop cum office cum godown or seperate godown or office for commission agents would be given on 80 years lease to the allottees. The land premium for the use of shop or office for commission agent as the case may be would be the premium charges for the said structure and land with development, in addittion to the premium would require to pay ground rent as prescribed by the authorities."

This means that the price to be paid for the shop in the new complex amounts to only theF.S.I rate and it would not be on ownership basis, the circular distributed among the traders state. Moreover such large projects never complete on time and the resulting cost-runs will drain the traders coffers at a time when the cloth market is slumped by lack of demand and liquidity problems.

The situation was entirely different in 1983 when the decision to shift the textile market of the C ward was taken. The real estate was peaking and the textile trade of the country was centered in Mumbai.

In recent years the textile trade has been diverted to various other places like Surat and Bhiwandi and Mumbai is no longer the hub of textil trade of the nation. While Savai claims to be having a support of most of the traders barring a handful and have already registered their names with AITC endorsing the shifting the opposition group alleges that the traders who are paying Rs.500 to AITC believing that it is deposit for the proposed shop are actually paying the amount as subscription towards membership of theassociation. The opposition group claims that plans are afoot to relocate only Mulji Jetha market and not the surrounding markets which are far more in numbers and it will not solve the problem of decongesting the area by shifting only one market. Savai has countered the allegation that the plan to shift the market includes all wholesale traders irrespective of the market. He said that aginst 900 shops in Mulji Jetha market the number of traders in the surrounding markets like Mangaldas market, Swadeshi market, Laxmidas market and shops located in non-textile markets is above 15000. It seems that the wires have crossed between the parties due to prevailing mis-information and efforts are called to solve the issue across the table barring allegations and counter-allegationsin the interest of the traders as a whole.