BRIBES SYSTEMATICALLY collected as “speed money” to expedite change of use applications for agricultural land in Surendranagar district is among the primary allegations levelled against former collector Rajendrakumar Patel, deputy mamlatdar Chandrasinh Mori and two other staff members of their office.
The Enforcement Directorate (ED) has said it found that the former collector would download the applications filed on the Integrated Online Revenue Applications (IORA) portal of the Revenue department of Gujarat for change of land use and then “fixed bribe rates ranging from Rs 5-10/sq metre,” as per the remand application filed before the court on Friday. On Friday, Patel was remanded in the ED’s custody until January 7.
On downloading the applications, “… columns were added whereby, the bribe rates were fixed ranging from Rs 5-10/ sq. mt based on the nature of application and the sections applicable under law.” The bribe was collected in cash and the accused IAS officer was the final approving authority, the agency said.
The agency added that it traced more than 800 such applications that had allegedly resulted in “generation of proceeds of crime to the tune of more than Rs 10 crore, which is part of the larger proceeds of crime.”
Quoting the statement of an individual who allegedly paid Rs 65 lakh in bribes for multiple applications at the rate of Rs 10 per square metre, the ED told the court that the person has made diary entries that described the payments as “Collector Office Bribe Expense”.
The ED told the court, “Rajendrakumar Mahendra Patel himself demanded and accepted huge amounts of bribe in lieu of providing speedy approvals to the applicants applying for change of land use from agriculture land to non-agricultural land. He is the biggest beneficiary of the proceeds of crime as per evidence on record.”
The ED also said it found expensive mobile phones in Patel’s residence during searches on December 23, the “source of which he could not explain”. The agency found that an apartment was purchased in Patel’s name and that he had been receiving rental income from the same in his mother’s account. The ED also claimed that Patel had not paid school fees for his two children and the agency believes that these transactions had taken place in cash “from the bribe money.”
Story continues below this ad
The Headquarters Investigation Unit (HIU-II) of the ED, Delhi, on Friday received 5-days remand of 2015-batch IAS officer Rajendra Mahendra Patel, the since-transferred District Collector of Surendranagar, in a corruption and money laundering investigation. This development came a day after deputy mamlatdar and Executive Magistrate Chandrasinh Bhupatsinh Mori was sent to judicial custody following the end of his seven-day remand on January 1.
On January 2, the ED team arrested Rajendra Patel, a 2015-batch IAS officer, from his home in Surendranagar and produced him before the Special PMLA court of Ahmedabad (Rural).
The two cases
On December 23, 2025, a zero FIR was filed under sections 12, 13(1)(d), 13(2) and 7 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, at the ACB police station in Ahmedabad, on the basis of which an FIR was registered (transferred) to the ACB police station in Surendranagar. This FIR has been deemed “sensitive” by the ACB.
Since the sections mentioned in the FIR also constitute scheduled offences under section 2(1)(y) of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA), the ED filed an Enforcement Case Information Report (ECIR) 43/2025 on the same day, and began its investigation.
Story continues below this ad
The next day, on December 24, 2025, the state government transferred Patel out of Surendranagar and placed his service at the disposal of the General Administration Department until further orders. He was posted in Surendranagar since February 1, 2025 and previously served as Municipal Commissioner in Surat city.
What is the primary accusation?
During investigation under the provisions of PMLA, the ED claims it found “large-scale corruption and generation of proceeds of crime through systematic extortion, demand, and collection of illegal gratification by public servants in the Office of the District Collector, Surendranagar, Gujarat, in connection with grant and processing of applications for Change of Land Use (CLU) and related statutory permissions under the Saurashtra Gharkhed Tenancy Settlement and Agricultural Lands Ordinance, 1949.”
Allegation against revenue official Mori
The ED, seeking remand of Chandrasinh Mori, told the court, “He was posted as Deputy Mamlatdar & Executive Magistrate in the Collector’s Office, Surendranagar, and was entrusted with title verification and processing of applications relating to Sections 54, 55, 65 and 65(B) of the said Ordinance, a position which enabled him to influence and control the pace and outcome of applications.”
The ED claimed, “Bribes were systematically demanded and collected as “speed money” for processing applications without delay. The bribe amount was pre-fixed, calculated on a per-square metre basis depending on the nature of application. Payments were routed through identified intermediaries/commission agents/dalals, whose names, roles, and contact details were recorded by him.”
Story continues below this ad
The ED seized Rs 67.50 lakh in cash concealed in a bedroom at Mori’s residence.
‘Hisaab’ sheets: Records of ‘corruption’
The ED claimed that the accused, Chandrasinh Bhupatsinh Mori, in his statement recorded under Section 17 of the PMLA on December 23, allegedly, “categorically admitted” that the seized cash represents bribe money demanded and collected by him, directly and through intermediaries, from applicants seeking expedited or favorable processing of statutory land-use applications.
After Mori’s remand ended and the ED sought to seek remand of Rajendra Patel, it told the court on January 2, that Mori had named Patel as “beneficiary of half the bribes”.
Mori allegedly also told the ED that the ‘hisaab’ for the same was kept by the PA of District Collector who would also collect the Collector’s half of the money, and hand it over to him.
Pending investigation
Story continues below this ad
The ED told the court that they are yet to investigate the “layering and integration of proceeds of crime”. They are also yet to determine the properties generated out of these proceeds of crime, as well as to glean the roles of other persons involved in the money laundering process.
Defence: ‘Illegal arrest, no unbroken money trail’
The IAS officer’s defence team claimed that Rajendra Patel’ arrest was “illegal” and so was the search at his home. Their argument was, “There was sufficient material available on record at the time of searching the premises of relatives of the arrestee. These satisfaction notes and the file showing the application of mind by AD, DD, JD, SD and Director, ED, may be preserved for judicial scrutiny. The same may be directed regarding the arrest. In the absence of these documents, the search and arrest may be declared as vexatious…”
Advocate Sameer B Gogda, appearing for Patel on Friday, also argued, “The arrest be treated as an illegal arrest, as there is no material on record to form reasons to believe that the arrestee is guilty of money laundering. No material to show that the arrestee is involved in any predicate offence or the arrestee had dealt with proceeds of crime arising out of a predicate offence.”
Gogda also argued that there is “no material on record to show an unbroken money trail leading to Rajendra Patel.”
