MARGAO: While Goa is still in festive mode, the State government has proposed yet another contentious amendment, which
according to activists, is aimed at benefiting the real estate lobby.
As per the notification published in the official gazette by the Revenue Department on November 3, the government seeks to further amend the Goa Land Revenue (Conversion of use of land and non-agricultural assessment) Rules, 1969.
Concerns have been raised that applications for converting agricultural land for non-agricultural purposes will no longer require it to be as thoroughly scrutinised as before. Moreover, activists point out that the system is not equipped to process these applications so quickly and yet via the amendment, the applications will be cleared quickly, and one can get a conversion sanad easily. Activists have said that providing such a single-window clearance is a recipe for disaster.
Furthermore, the public has been given only 15 days to send in their objections and suggestions to these draft rules. As per the amendment, a report/NOC/recommendation shall be obtained from the Town and Country Planning (TCP) Department, Forest Department, Inspector of Survey and Land Records and Mamlatdar, who shall submit their report/ NOC/recommendation within a period of 20 days, failing which the Collector shall proceed to decide the application for conversion on the basis of the information as available.
Goencho Swabhiman Party (GSP) President Swapnesh Sherlekar explained that these draft rules lay the entire responsibility of issuing a
conversion sanad in the hands of the Dy Collector or Collector.
Providing reasons as to why this is a flawed process, he gave the example of how getting a report from the Forest Department within 20 days is not possible.
“There is no existing practice wherein a person can apply to the Forest Department asking for a tree canopy density certificate. If the density is beyond 40% then ideally the Forest Department does not grant the recommendation/NOC as when it is above 40%, it qualifies as a private forest,” said Sherlekar.
He said there are gaps in possibly doing away with the need for getting the recommendations from the other departments like TCP, Land Survey and the Mamlatdar’s office. “We are bypassing if the other departments have any specific observations to give in the matter. For example, the mamlatdar may have pertinent field information that the Dy Collector may not know offhand, while making the decision,” Sherlekar added.
“My main contention is that by the arrest of that Bardez mamlatdar for fraud in the land record, it established that the government’s system is not foolproof and it is vulnerable to frauds. This particular amendment is not going to strengthen the system but will further weaken the system,” said Sherlekar.
