Law Commission recommends retrieval of land transferred under Roshni Scheme

‘Forest, other categories of land be also recuperated’

*Says Act justified loot-scoot, benefited big-wigs only

Mohinder Verma

JAMMU, Mar 6: Dubbing the Jammu and Kashmir State Lands (Vesting of Ownership to the Occupants) Act and its Rules as typical example of the fences swallowing the crop, the J&K Law Commission headed by Justice (Retd) M K Hanjura has recommended immediate retrieval of land transferred in favour of illegal beneficiaries under the garb of this legislation as only the wealthy, the mighty and those wielding political clout got benefitted.
Moreover, the Law Commission has recommended that a reliable and a consistent inventory of entire State land as also that of the forest and other categories owned by the Government be made and a system of maintaining a data base of such lands be introduced as early as possible.
The J&K State Lands (Vesting of Ownership to the Occupants) Act commonly known as Roshni Scheme had received the assent of the Governor on November 9, 2001 to give proprietary rights to the persons unauthorizedly holding the State land on payment of the cost equivalent to the prevailing market rate.
The procedural wrangles as also the apprehension that the eviction of the unauthorized occupants will lead to mass unrest formed the base line and the bedrock of the legislation.
Subsequently, the Government vide SRO-64 dated May 5, 2007 made the Rules for mapping of the State land, issuance of the notification, disposal of property left by the unauthorized occupants, the procedure for auction and eviction, determination of market value, vesting of ownership to the occupants of the structures raised over the State land, the fixation of price payable by different categories of occupants, the incentive and penalty for payment etc.
Latterly, the J&K State Lands (Vesting of Ownership to the Occupants) (Repeal and Savings) Act was assented to by the then Governor on December 7, 2018 mentioning that any proceedings pending before any authority under the Act of 2001 shall not be proceeded with and all pending proceedings shall stand abated. But no decision was taken in respect of the land already transferred to large number of people under the garb of Roshni Scheme.
However, after detailed examination of the Act of 2001 and going through various judgements of Supreme Court as well as different High Courts of the country, the J&K Law Commission headed by Justice (Retd) M K Hanjura has recommended retrieval of the land transferred in favour of the illegal beneficiaries under the garb of the Act of 2001.
“Since the Act of 2001 and Rules framed thereunder have been repealed but the orders of regularization and subsequent mutations attested under the garb of the Act and Rules have not been set at naught”, the Chairperson of the Law Commission said, adding “to appreciate the magnificence of the law and the will to unravel and unearth the mistakes committed, the State land and any other land which is the property of the State and is in the occupation of such occupants or the ownership of which has devolved unto them be retrieved in whatever form such land may be at the moment”.
The Commission has also recommended that a reliable and consistent inventory of the State land including that of the forest land and other lands owned by the Government be made and a system of maintaining a data base of such lands be introduced.
“The forest and the State lands which have been encroached unauthorizedly and which didn’t fall within the domain and scope of the Act of 2001 and the Rules be recuperated and revised and posted into the same condition in which these were prior to such encroachments”, the Commission has further recommended.
While making these recommendations, the Commission has observed, “no provision was kept for the rehabilitation of the poor, the landless and the BPL families. Even the refugees of 1947 were also excluded from the class of beneficiaries of the State land under the Act and mere physical possession over the State land qualified an illegal occupant for grant of ownership right”.
“The Act and the Rules are a typical example of the fences swallowing the crop. These are covered in dust from top to toe. Moreover, the Government had gone against the grain in legislating the Act and in framing the Rules”, Justice Hanjura said, adding “such a legislation where a huge chunk of land in which public in general had an interest has been conveniently allowed to be transferred to the trespassers and the encroachers by a blatant misuse of the public trust and power cannot find place in any nook and corner of the country”.
Commenting on the logic given by the Government behind enactment of the law, the Commission asked, “will it be rational to deliver the stolen property to a thief on the analogy that the prosecution of a thief for the acts of omission and commission done by him will take a long time”, adding “such an assertion is rash and outrageous as on the bulwark of this principle of reasoning the State will be well within its jurisdiction to ask the perpetrator of a crime of a rape to marry the victim without a trial”.
Stating that ultimate aim behind enactment of the law was to grab the public property by hook or crook by those holding the corridors and the wheels of the power, the Law Commission said, “it is only the wealthy, the mighty and those wielding the political clout got benefitted by the legislation”, adding “the Act and the Rules don’t withstand the test and scrutiny of the law”.
“On the face of the evolved legal position and the law those who had encroached upon the land described in the Act ought to have been evicted from such land. However, to add insult to the injury in addition to portraying extreme helplessness in evicting the encroachers the reserve price of the land was directed to be fixed as per the rates prevailing in the year 1990 when the Act itself was enacted in the year 2001 and came into force from the year 2002”, the Commission said.
“The policy of loot and scoot was adopted by the State throwing all the norms and the laws to the winds just to benefit the big-wings”, the Commission has concluded.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here