25 Mar 2018 | 05:10am IST
All culprits of orchard land conversion should face retrospective criminal action
The decision of the TCP department to introduce the 49-6 section, making it mandatory to obtain an NOC for sale of all land for residential purposes, including those falling under the Regional Plan, was timely to arrest the rampant sub division and sale of plots on orchard land.But the decision will only serve to arrest more eco-sensitive land being sacrificed at the altar of sheer greed, with so-called developers of these plots, getting under hand and tacit approvals, obviously for interesting gains, from local political forces. But the move to declare this as a criminal act will be commendable only if cases are investigated retrospectively and not from the day the fresh 49-6 amendment came into being.The NOC was earlier only applicable to lands in areas falling within the control of Outline Development Plans, will now be applicable for all lands and sale will be permitted only if the document states that the land is zoned as settlement.However a few things need to be immediately ironed out. We need to know what is the procedure and rules framed for obtaining a NOC for registration of sale deeds, the fee prescribed and the time frame for such NOCs to be issued. A positive step should not be trapped in a quagmire of red tape and delay, which will block genuine cases of conversion, if any.At the same time it must be understood that the attempt is to ensure absolute minimal need based conversion with an effort that this practice stops completely and this will happen if earlier violations are punished, and adequate deterrents and punishment are not only built in but enforced vigourously. This itself will need a strong infrastructure because the success of this will depend completely on supervision.This itself brings into focus the length of time when lakhs and lakhs of square metres were converted rampantly and apartments and homes sold to unsuspecting buyers on orchard and other eco-sensitive land.A major criminal investigation must be launched on all past conversions of this nature, to ascertain local influences which allowed this to happen. It is clear that the culprits are across all parties. The surrender of Goa happens through these instances, perhaps even more than allowing mega projects in villages. While we see rampant people’s movements (many of them justifiably) against mega projects in villages, there has been no people’s uprising against the sale of Goa, plot by plot in a manner where more than crores of square metres have been converted in this manner in RP areas and not in ODP areas.This further strengthens the case of one state one plan where the positive aspects of ODPs can be applicable in village areas and vice versa. The idea of opening up development in settled areas except those lands in khazan, paddy fields, low lying areas etc is positive with a caveat that planning has to be updated and frozen for the next ten years on new ground realities. Going back to the 2001 plan, while making no progress on the 2030 Regional Plan is not a sign of progress but of going backward.
