The Koregaon Bhima Commission of Inquiry on Monday asked the authorities of Dr Babasaheb Ambedkar Research and Training Institute (BARTI) to file an affidavit in connection with the civil dispute related to the ‘Jaystambh’ land.

The Commission has also sought information about BARTI about its role in managing the programs on the occasion of Koregaon Bhima battle anniversary on January 1.

The two-member commission, headed by retired high court judge Justice J N Patel, with former chief secretary Sumit Mallick serving as its second member, was constituted by the state government for probing into the causes of violence in Koregaon Bhima area on January 1, 2018, in which one person had died and several others were left injured.

According to historical records, the Jaystambh, a military monument located in Perne village on the Pune–Ahilyanagar highway, was erected by the British government in 1821 in memory of its soldiers who fought against the Peshwas at Koregaon Bhima on January 1, 1818.

Later, the British appointed their soldier Kandojibin Gajoji Jamadar – who was wounded in the Battle of Koregaon Bhima – as the in-charge of the Jaystambh on December 13, 1824.

His successors say that as per the ‘sanad (official order)’ given to Kandojibin Gajoji Jamadar by the British government a few years after the battle, their family was given possession of about 260 acres of awarded land, along with the Jaystambh land, till the time they had male successors.

According to the Jamadar family, which belongs to the Maratha community, both British and Peshwa forces comprised soldiers of different castes. Thus, they say the battle of Koregaon Bhima cannot be linked to any particular caste or religion, and that it was not a war against casteism.

But, as per a Dalit Ambedkarite narrative, the British Army, comprising 500 soldiers from the Mahar community, defeated a 28,000-strong force of Peshwas in this battle.

Lakhs of Ambedkarites across Maharashtra and other parts of the country visit the Jaystambh on January 1, calling it ‘Shaurya Din (victory day)’ to pay tribute to soldiers who, they believe, fought a war for freedom against the alleged casteism of the Peshwas.

For the last few years, BARTI, an institute under the department of social justice, has been involved in the arrangements of January 1 programs at and around Jaystambh.

Commission’s secretary V V Panitkar said, “A meeting with BARTI officials was called about the management of Jaystambh, celebration of “Shaurya Din” and land dispute with the Jamadar family. BARTI’s Director General Deepa Mudhol Munde and others were present for the meeting and they have asked to file an affidavit on these points.”

In 2015, the Bhima Koregaon Vijay Stambh Saurakshan and Savardhan Samiti, a private outfit, wrote to the then minister of social justice Rajkumar Badole alleging that the Jamadar family’s name was illegally included on a 7/12 extract of Jaystambh land.

The Samiti demanded that the Jamadar family’s name be removed from the Jaystambh land, due the alleged encroachments by them on the said property.

Following the minister’s remarks on the Samiti’s letter, the government initiated action against the Jamadar family and removed their name from the said land.

Then, Captain Balasaheb Jamadar, a retired Indian Army officer and a successor of Kandojibin Gajoji Jamadar, rejected the allegations and filed a civil suit against the Samiti, the state government (through the Collector of Pune District) and BARTI, seeking an order of permanent injunction to restrain the government from dispossessing them of the Jaystambh land.

According to Captain Jamadar, the land has remained in his family’s possession ever since it was given to them by the British. The family also has a house near the Jaystambh.

A civil court in Pune passed an order against Jamadar in December 2017. Jamadar filed an appeal and the matter is currently pending before a court of civil judge senior division in Pune. A Bombay

High Court order dated September 17, 2025, requested the trial court to expedite the hearings of this civil suit and decide the matter within one year. It also stated that till disposal of the suit, the status quo order passed by the High court on June 14, 2018 in this matter, shall continue.