“If any sort of ‘modus operandi’ is allowed to be used clandestinely to subvert the provisions of the Goa Land Use (Regulation) Act and also its perpetrators are allowed to go scot free, there is reasonable apprehension that not a single agriculture land will be left in the State of Goa in near future,” this is a serious concern raised by the Fact Finding Committee- constituted to study the land issue at Tiracol Village- where M/s Leading Hotel Private Ltd has proposed Golf Course and Resort project.
The Fact Finding Report prepared by IAS Sandip Jacques-ascertaining that the land in litigation was a agriculture land as well as prima facie reveals to be a tenanted land- was the first major setback to the BJP-led government- who defended before High Court that the land is not agriculture land. To prove their stand, Government itself constituted the fact finding committee-the report which came as shocker to the ruling dispension-is yet to be accepted by the Government.
As per the two petitioners before High Court St Anthony Tenant and Mundkar Association (SATMA) and Goa Foundation (GF)- Over 9 lakh sq kms of Tiracol village were acquired by Leading Hotels claiming that the original owners had said there were no tenants and mundkars residing on the land. However, villagers who say they have lived in the village for generations claim to be tenants, some even having their names on the Form I & XIV.
In September 2, 2015 Government constituted the fact finding committee to study/ examine the allegations made by the Petitioners in the Public Interest Litigation-St Anthony Tenant and Mundkar Association (SATMA) that the project proponent fraudulently purchased agriculture-tenanted land. The one man committee has to study whether the land in question was tenanted/ agriculture land, whether the land is tenanted or non tenanted land and whether any person was or not tenant of that land.
The report recommending judicial inquiry into the tenanted land issue, submitted in December 2015 was kept under wrap by Government for almost two months- when in February the petitioner GF disclosed the very fact about the report being presented to Government.
Deputy Chief Minister and Minister for Revenue Francis D’Souza was on record to state that the committee has failed to come out with the “authentic” finding. “The report is not authentic. It has no clear findings, though to some extent it says that certain land is tenanted but there also he cannot certify it,” he had stated.
Land in question, was indeed Agriculture Land
The Fact Finding Committee in its report admitted that the land was an agriculture land purely on basis of the old records maintained under the Manual Form I and XIV (part XIV Crop Cultivation) indicating entries of certain types of crops grown in the area during a particular period and survey of which was carried out by the Talathis under the supervision of the Office of the Mamlatdar.
Three independent survey mechanisms–First survey post liberation by Land Survey Department, second by Soil Classification Block and Forms maintained by DSLR-evidently points out that there were indeed crops grown in parts of that area like bhaat, cashew, nachane, udit, kudit, etc in the past.
“Moreover, there is also evidence of other agricultural activities taking place on the said land in the past and continues even as of now, wherein consequent to the growing of the cashew trees, cashew apples are being plucked and juice being extracted thereof by the very same people for distillation of liquor, which has been ascertained and confirmed from the Excise Commission,” the report stated adding observation is based on data provided to the authority from the year 1993 to 2015.
“The pat of the land in question was agricultural in nature could also be further supported by the Collector’s Land Acquisition Award of the year 1982 for acquisition of land in parts of survey No 2 in the Tiracol Village,” it added.
Land In question Tenanted Land? Prime Facie indicate so
The Committee observed that there are a number of cases wherein Orders of Declaration of Tenancy or Purchase Orders and Certificated issued under the Agricultural Tenancy Act- which either have subsequently been set aside or are pending adjudication before the appropriate appellate courts. Nevertheless, it is also a fact that there are a number of cases where such Orders of Declaration of Tenancy and Orders of Purchase although issues have neither been challenged nor set aside.
An area of 12,18,000 sq mtrs has been sold by the ‘Khalaps’ to M/s Leading Hotels. The first deed of sale took place in November 2007. It has thereafter been seen that ‘Negative Declaration’ Orders have been obtained from the Civil Court and from the Mamlatdar in 134 cases for an area of about 7,87,227 sq mtrs purely on the basis of ‘admission’ of the ‘opponent’ to the claim of the ‘plaintiff’ or ‘without any resistance’.
“It is just incomprehensible to believe that it is a mere co-incidence that, only after the property in question was sold by the Khalaps to the project proponent, in parts from November 2007 onwards, that some of the persons who were earlier claiming to be tenants or even declared so, have suddenly realized that the entries in the record of rights were erroneous. One can understand one or two cases but not the whole village and that too not almost at the same time. There is something more than what meets the eye,” the report stated.
“How it is possible that all the people in the village, somewhat at the same time after a gap of 10-15 years, suddenly at the same time realize that their names have wrongly been recorded and that the entries in the survey records (as tenants) are erroneous? How can the very same people who have earlier either applied under section 7 of the Agricultural Tenancy Act for declaration of tenancy and have obtained a declaration of being a tenant, subsequently take a view that their names have wrongly been recorded in the Record of Right? It added.
Committee doesn’t subscribe to Leading Hotels claims
Based on the discussion and study, it appears that the submission made by the Respondent, that the lands are not agricultural tenanted land and that all the names figuring in the tenants’ column and the cultivators’ column of the records of rights were erroneous entries and that the same have been admitted to by the parties concerned and have accordingly been deleted from the records upon proper proceedings, cannot be accepted. The submission cannot sustain.
Serious Concern raised
Goa being a very small state in size and land being scare especially agricultural land, the provisions of the Goa Land Use (Regulation) Act needs to enforced with all sincerity and if any sort of ‘modus operandi’ is allowed to be used clandestinely to subvert the provisions of the Act and also its perpetrators are allowed to go scot free, there is reasonable apprehension that not a single agriculture land will be left in the State of Goa in near future.
