Fayaz Bukhari
Srinagar, July 14: A major land scam has been unearthed by the Audit findings of Roshni Act in the State as it has found large scale regularization of post-Roshni launch encroachments done by the officials.
The Principal Accountant General, Dr Subhash Chandra Pandey in its interim report based on the study of Roshni Act and Rules of 1250 land transfer cases in Budgam, Anantnag, Srinagar and Jammu districts has found that the scheme was announced without prior survey and identification of eligible beneficiaries leaving scope of post scheme launch encroachments being regularised.
Finance Department has taken serious note of the findings of the Audit. It has declared the findings as quite grave, raising questions of propriety in the implementation of the scheme and post scheme launch encroachments.
The Audit report on Roshni Act says that thousands of applications have been rejected but illegal occupants have not been disposed of the illegally occupied land so far.
The report says that by fixing a cut off date for regularization at 31-03-2004, the scheme allowed the benefit even to those who actually occupy or claim to have unauthorisedly occupied public lands after the 2001 Act.
The interim report says that the main objective of the Act of raising resource for investment in power sector stand frustrated. “Only Rs 76.24 crore had been realised by 31st March 2013 as against Rs 25, 000 crore”, the report reveals.
“Instead of assisting the State exchequer in raising resources, the rules facilitated transfer of precious public land to unauthorised occupants at the prices below market rates and large scale transfer of agriculture lands free of costs”, the report reveals.
The report has declared as illegal all the transfers of lands shown as agriculture in the office records and all other land transfers done below committee-fixed price and has recommended its rescinding.
The report says that under the rules, the implementation of the scheme of regularizing unauthorised occupation of State land has been entrusted almost exclusively to the very officials, whose statutory duty is to protect public lands from unauthorised occupation. “Anybody can claim to be unauthorised occupant and get public land almost free under the opaque system instituted by the Rules. Basic rules and canons of financial propriety and public accountability stand compromised”, the report adds.
“There has been huge delay in the disposal of applications received for regularization. No priority list or waiting list is being maintained, leading to selective disposal of pending applications and attendant risks”, the report adds.
The report has found that the cases that were cleared the payments are still pending. It says that it is not lawfully possible for any executive officer to entertain any payment received after 2 years in land transfer cases.
The report suggests that in such cases eviction process should be completed within two months after the lapse of the time period of two years.
The Audit Department has sought clarifications from field officers vide DO letters addressed to Private Secretary Finance Department (dated April 16, 2013, March 1, 2013 and December 26, 2012) but so far the department has failed to get any response.
The Finance Department has sought detailed response of Revenue Relief and Rehabilitation Department and Law Justice and Parliamentary Affairs Department. The two departments have also been asked to suggest the need for taking corrective measures and propose an action bound programme.
The department has asked the two departments why the illegal occupants of the land whose cases have been rejected have not been dispossessed of the illegal occupation and has also asked questions about transfer of land to unauthorised occupants at below market prices and transfer of agriculture land free of cost.
The Finance Department has also asked the Revenue Relief and Rehabilitation Department that the system should be made transparent. The two departments had been given a deadline of June 15 for filing response but almost a month has passed since the deadline expired and they have failed to file it.
Trending Now
E-Paper
Follow our WhatsApp channel