Valmiki Faleiro's Weekly Column.

GOAN MUTATIONS.

By Valmiki Faleiro.

In law, it is a simple administrative process. In practice, it is far from it. Symptomatic of the malaise that afflicts governance in India’s smallest – and most corrupt – state, a simple thing like mutation (getting a land ownership change reflected in revenue records) has evolved into a fine art, where the ‘Aam Aadmi’ is roundly harassed for bribes every step of the way. So much that a few days after the current Chief Minister, Digambar Kamat, assumed office last June, he extracted a “promise” from Mamlatdars that mutations would be done within an outer limit of one month. It may interest Kamat to know that mutation applications filed by me on 27-Aug-2007 before the Quepem Mamlatdar were decided only this month!

Beginning this Sunday, let us look at this bewildering world of Goan mutations(something I said I would do, on Feb 12, 2006.) Let us first look at how the process is meant to work under law and then how it actually works in practice. When the ownership of land changes by way of a registered deed – like sale, gift, extra-judicial partition, relinquishment, etc. – the Sub-Registrar after registering the deed is enjoined by law to notify the concerned Mamlatdar in a form* prescribed for the purpose. Upon receipt of that form with a copy of the registered document, the Mamlatdar must effect the mutation in the relevant Forms I & XIV (F. I&XIV.) This issupposed to be an automatic process where the transferee of land rights need do nothing. In practice, nothing of the sort happens. Not a single revenue minister from the time the Record of Rights in F. I&XIV was promulgated around the mid-1970s – fromPratapsing Rane as a MGP minister then, to Jose Fillip D’Souza today – has bothered to find out why the procedure stipulated under law has not been followed.

Let’s check out what happens instead. Where the status of land ownership changes by ways other than a registered deed –e.g. by a judicially decreed partition, ‘Inventario,’ will/bequest, etc. – the law provides that the transferee will report the change to the Mamlatdar, who in turn will carry out the mutation through his concerned Talathi. In reality, though, all ownership changes – including by registered documents – are unlawfully routed through the latter channel, forcing bulk of people to approach the revenue officials and submit themselves to harassment and extortion.

Let’s see how the odyssey of woes of the ‘aam aadmi’ begins. I shall dwell even on ludicrous details, to give you an idea of what goes on in Goa, the much-touted “No. 1 State” – an orphan child really, where those in power are obsessed solely with their agenda of looting the exchequer in the quickest possible time. You report the acquisition of rights in writing to the Mamlatdar or his Talathi. You must, understandably, annex a certified copy of the document (deed, will, courtdecree, etc.) in proof of how the rights have been acquired. But there are three other“requirements” that defy logic (none of them prescribed/stipulated under the law orrules.)

The first is providing postal address of people whose names appear in F. I&XIV. This is easy where there is/are only one/few names (from whom you acquired the rights) –their addresses will show in the cause title of the document by which the rights were acquired. What when one buys say a plot in a colony of 100 plots, where the names of 99 previous purchasers already appear in F. I&XIV? How are you to collect these 99 addresses? And why should you? When the same Mamlatdar or Talathi carried out these 99 mutations and has all the addresses in his records? But, no, either produce all the addresses (for service of notices) … or shell out more money on newspaper advertisements for substituted service. (Newspapers, of course, won’t complain!).

The second requirement is that you must also provide the latest F. I&XIV – to the same authority that is its custodian! Which means, pay the Mamlatdar to issue you the relevant F. I&XIV and then give it back to him with your mutation application. Lastly, put all your papers in a proper file – or the Mamlatdar’s office won’t accept them! Whatever happened to the good old government paper files that had notingsheets on the left side and correspondence to the right, held together with a red filestring, and secured in the notorious “red-tape” cardboard docket? How can note sheets be handled in commercial files? No questions if you want your mutation done! Once your application is accepted after all these obstacles, congrats, you’ve just got past Round One.

Now brace for the ensuing rounds! (To continue.)

* Form-XIII, vide proviso (2) of Sec.96 of Land Revenue Code, 1968 and Rule 15 ofRecord of Rights & Register of Cultivators Rules, 1969. (ENDS.)

The Valmiki Faleiro weekly column at:

FLORIAN LOBO WRITES ON GOA GOVERNOR.

From: floriano (floriano.lobo@gmail.com)

Sent: Saturday, October 25, 2008 1:50:36 PM

To: A. Veronica Fernandes (averonicaf806@hotmail.com)

Yesterday, 24th. October, 2008 was the day fixed for the first appeal by the office of the Governor of Goa at Raj Bhavan. It is because I refused to accept the explanation given to me for the application I made through the Directorate of Accounts that the expenditure of the Governor's office be given to me under the 'Right to Information Act'. And my application asked for past 10 year's expenditures on all heads whether it be flights in and out of Goa or the entertainment bill of the Raj Bhavan. The refusal was that the Governor's office is exempted from RTI Act, 2005 vide Section 8 (1)(c) which states as under:

" information, the disclosure of which would cause a breach of privilege of Parliament or the State Legislature"

The refusal also stated the Governor's office being exempted by the provisions of the Constitution of India. Under which provisions of the Constitution of India this exemption was being referred to was not mentioned.

[ The RTI application along with the refusal from the Governor's office may be referred to in the 'comments on news reports' section of www.goasu-raj.org ]

The officer hearing the appeal was Shri. Nikhil Kumar, Secretary to the Governor [Ex-Collector, North Goa]. The PIO, Governor's Office: Dr. Radhakrishnan.

When asked by the chair to put forth my arguments, I argued as follows:-

1. That I challenge the exemption cited under RTI on the specious ground that I am not asking any information other than the information relating to how my money money, as a tax-paying citizen of Goa, is being spent. That the Governor, being the public servant, is accountable.

2. That I would like to know under which provisions of the India Constitution the Governor's office is exempted.

Dr. Radhakrishnan deposed as under:-

That the matter whether the Governor's office is covered under the RTI Act is presently being taken up by the High Court of Bombay at Goa. That there are more than one petitions in this regards pending with the HC. That the HC has stayed the proceedings and is likely to issue an order shortly. Therefore, this matter be kept pending until such time that the HC issues the order.


Dr. Radhakrishnan cited Constitutional articles 202 (3) (a) and article 203 under which the office of the Governor is said to be exempted.

I also displayed to the chair the load of information on the respective expenses incurred by various governmental departments received by me following the directive of the Directorate of Accounts to the departments and argued that if the government is accountable, then surely the office of the governor is accountable. I also argued that it is accepted that the head of the state is due certain privileges. But if the Head of the state goes on a spending binge at the cost of the gullible tax-payers, then this is unconstitutional for a democracy and that this must be thoroughly investigated and the abuse thereof checked.

The proceeding ended in a most cordial manner. I had asked Dr. N.S. Dumo to be present with me as a witness to the proceedings, which he obliged.

The meeting ended with me congratulating Shri. Nikhil Kumar for doing a thorough job of submitting the accurate report on the violations of the CRZ norms by the three hotels i.e. Estrela do mar, Par Fragrance and La Calyso, whereby the La Calypso has been already shed of the extra weight within the 200 meters and the other two are awaiting the treatment.

He laughed it off as a job in line with his duties.

floriano
goasuraj
www.goasu-raj.org
9890470896

PS: Because of the above engagement, we could not be present at the felicitation function of Matanhy Saldanha at Cansaulim, which is regretted.