The Deputy Collector of Dharbandora, Agnelo Fernandes’ order, declaring that agricultural tenancy does not apply to the project site of the vexed Tiracol Golf Course and Villa project, quite naturally flies in the face of logic for the Tiracol villagers.
The order, also prima facie, concludes dramatically that agricultural tenancy laws don’t apply to the Tiracol project site. The facts relied upon by the Deputy Collector to reach this conclusion will undoubtedly be scrutinised when the next available options are exercised by the St Anthony’s Tenant and Mundkars Association who are shocked beyond doubt at such an order.
The observations of the High court which dealt with the petition of the St Anthony’s Tenants and Mundkars Association (SATMA) give a clear indication of the court’s mind. The observations made by the High Court, which quashed and set aside all tenancy free certificates obtained for the purpose of constructing the controversial Rs 500 crore plus golf course at Tiracol, and prohibited construction activity till an inquiry is conducted in the matter; merit a recall.
The High Court, on March 31, this year, made strong remarks on the role of the Deputy Collector who granted the certificates to Leading Hotels Ltd, for not examining the tenancy issue as per the law, and ordered that the NOC granted by the town planning authorities and the sanad granted by the collector be kept in abeyance until after the inquiry.
It observed that the deputy collector had granted tenancy-free certificates to the respondent M/s Leading Hotel Pvt Ltd without examining all aspects of the law.
A division bench he High Court said it cannot allow the objects of beneficial legislations like the Agricultural Tenancy Act 1964 and Land Use Act, which are measures of agrarian reforms, to be defeated if the subject lands are in fact tenanted.
Section 2 of the Land Use Act, which came into in force on November 2, 1990, provides that no land which is vested in a tenant under the provisions of the Goa, Daman and Diu Agricultural Tenancy Act, 1964 shall be used or allowed to be used for any purpose other than agriculture.
And the St Anthony’s Tenants and Mundkar’s Association has clearly stated that there were tenants shown in the survey records in 1990.
The Deputy Collector which effectively nullifies all this, has made out a case mainly on the grounds that “not a single document relied upon by the respondents, Goa Foundation and SATMA”, are part of the present inquiry before him, hence do have any evidentiary value.
Importantly, the Tenancy Free Certificates issued by Dy Collector, Pernem, were produced by the Leading Hotels in their support (to show that the land they bought was not tenanted and hence good to develop), were accepted.
But Goa Foundation and SATMA too produced evidence of the earlier Tenancy Free certificates issued by Dy Collector Pernem which were quashed and set aside by the High Court .This did not pass muster with the Deputy Collector Inquiry officer.
The order states: No cogent evidence was produced by the respondents (to support that the land of the Tiracol villagers was tenanted and hence could not have been sold in the first place)
The tone of the order that the documents of a Foundation and SATMA were not perfect where as the ones produced by Leading Hotels were perfect, is surprising since that wasn’t the tenor of even the High Court under whose aegis this inquiry by the Deputy Collector was carried out. In the case of Goa Foundation and SATMA the collector mentions throughout the order that documents have no value since they were either partly translated or “did not belong to the current inquiry”.
While no order by a court or a quasi court or an inquiry can be dismissed simply because it doesn’t appear to be believable, this order has to be seen in the context of evidences and documents which the High Court has relied upon were the same set of documents rejected by an inquiry officer of the government.
And most importantly, if the documents in the eyes of the Inquiry officer were incomplete or did not belong to the inquiry, then the villagers of Tiracol have right to more time for corrective documents to be submitted.
At the end of the day the ends of justice have to be met. If the Deputy Collector’s observations stand the test of time and his decision on the tenancy issue is irrefutable and can stand further judicial scrutiny, Leading Hotels and those who are backing them have a right to their hard earned victory. But right now, for the company making one of the world’s most luxurious golf courses on this land, it’s not tee time yet.
