Agricultural tenancy is being claimed on orchard lands like coconut groves and cashew plantations, with several mundkarial houses on the land. As per the Agricultural Tenancy Act, an agricultural tenant cannot be a mundkar on the same land, but in almost all cases a mundkar also claims to be an agricultural tenant of coconut groves or cashew plantations, where there are several mundkarial houses along with his own house.
The fifth amendment of 1976 Agricultural Tenancy Act, does not clarify agricultural tenancy on orchard land with several mundkarial houses on the same land. Most of the claimants of agricultural tenancy on mundkar occupied lands were supervisors and the other mundkars of the same land were fruit pluckers, toddy tappers and distillers (laborers). The supervisors were only caretakers and not agricultural tenants on orchard lands as they do not come under the land to the tiller. There are no lease agreements with the orchard land owners. Excise challans or rent receipts for selling the owner’s fruits in his absence do not amount to agricultural tenancy, as this does not amount to the work of tilling the soil of the land.
Mamlatdars’ decisions to declare such caretakers as agricultural tenants with false witnesses produced by them and wrong survey taken in the absence of the owners, does not justify the right to agricultural tenancy declaration. The present government’s decision to change the Agricultural Tenancy Act and refer all the pending cases and appeals from the mamlatdar and deputy collector to the sessions court is a decision in the right direction for fair justice.
On the basis of the Supreme Court judgment dated March 22, 2012, the court said, “No one acquires title to the property if he or she was allowed to stay in the premises graciously. Even by long possession of years or decades such person would not acquire any right or interest in the said property.” Possession of such orchard land must not be treated as right to possession by the agricultural tenant. They should not be allowed to damage the orchard land in the name of agricultural tenants or mundkars, as such rights will damage the environment and ecology of the land.
This is the reason why ownership rights should be upheld to avoid damage to orchard land and discourage the agricultural tenants and mundkars to construct new houses and extend old houses in the owners land and violate CRZ, TCP and no NOC from concerned authorities. The authorities should uphold the Supreme Court judgment mentioned above irrespective of any laws prevailing in Goa.
