DCs say no prohibition but require clarification
Nishikant Khajuria
JAMMU, July 16: In what it can be termed as another instance of administrative inertia in Jammu and Kashmir, confusion continues to prevail upon grant of permission for alienation of the land recorded as Ghair-Mumkin Khad in Revenue records.
Even as the Gair Mumkin Khad does not find any mention in any of the categories of land prohibited for transfer under the new land laws implemented in the Union Territory of J&K since October 26, 2020, the concerned authorities are still awaiting clarification over the same from the higher ups.
Because of the prevailing confusion, scores of people are continuously suffering as they are not able to sell their own land, which has been recorded as Ghair Mumkin Khad in the Revenue records notwithstanding its actual nature being different from water basin and in many cases a developed colony.
A number of applications received by the office of Deputy Commissioners for grant of permission for alienation of the land recorded as Ghair Mumkin Khad after being duly vetted as per SRO 456 of 2017 are pending for the disposal for the last more than an year.
Further, the confusion is also causing revenue loss to the Government of J&K, which is losing crores of rupees by way of stamp duty on the sale/purchase of land (Ghair Mumkin Khad).
The entire confusion revolves around a communication of then Financial Commissioner (Revenue), issued by No. FC-LS/Misc-288/2020, dated 22-10-2020, forwarded to Deputy Commissioners and warning the Revenue field staff not to issue fards of land of water sources like Chhappri, talab, Springs, Chahs (wells) etc and the water courses like river, rivulets, streams, Chois, Kassi or Kas, Nallahs and Khads etc as the same is prohibited as section 20-B, 21 and 21 of now repealed J&K Big Landed Estates Abolition Act, Svt 2007.
However, after the land laws were amended vide S.O 3808(E) dated 26th October 2020, whereby the J&K Big Landed Estates Abolition Act Svt 1996 was repealed, the FC Revenue’s order prohibiting alienation of land recorded as Ghair Mumkin Khad is not supposed to be in force.
The matter has come into light following a communication by the Divisional Commissioner Jammu Raghav Langar to all the Deputy Commissioner’s for their comment on the issue of sale/purchase of Ghair Mumkin Khad.
Responding to the Divisional Commissioner’s letter, dated 24-06-2021, Deputy Commissioner Jammu and Deputy Commissioner Rajouri have clearly mentioned that there was no prohibition on sale/purchase of Ghair Mumkin Khad but only a confusion, which needs clarification.
In his reply; No.DCJ/SQ/GM Khad/2021-22/167172, dated 06-07-2021, Deputy Commissioner Jammu, Anshul Garg has explained that prohibition does not apply to the land recorded as Ghair Mumkin Khads and other lands of such kind as per plan reading of the provisions of Section 133-BB of Land revenue Act.
“As such, it is requested that clarification regarding the alienation of lands recorded as Gair Mumkin Khads and all such other lands which do not fall under the ambit of State Water Policy and Plan (SRO-456 of 2017), may be sought in view of the latest amendments in the land laws from the higher authorities so that several such application pending in this office may be disposed of accordingly,” read the DC Jammu’s response communication to Divisional Commissioner.
Similarly, the Deputy Commissioner Rajouri, Rajesh Shavan has replied that Section 133-BB of the Land Revenue Act prohibits the transfer of land like grazing land, Arak, Kah-i-Krisham or land growing fodder and fuel or such class as notified by the Government thus making it clear that transfer of Ghair Mumkin Khad was not prohibited.
Admitting that the revenue field agencies are confronted with decision about the alienation of the Ghair-Mumkin Khad land and the rate of fee to be charged while allowing the conversion of land use, the DC Rajouri, vide his communication DC/R/2021-22/PA/330-31, dated 12-07-2021 to the Divisional Commissioner Jammu, has requested that necessary action may kindly be taken at an earliest.
Even after more than three weeks, response of other Deputy Commissioners was still awaited whereas the Divisional Commissioner Jammu had sought a detailed report along with specific comment on the matter within one week positively.
Follow our WhatsApp channel
