CAG report unravels shortfalls in land acquisition and site allotment practices

UNNECASSARY INVOKING OF THE URGENCY CLAUSE IN LAND ACQUISTION 
GANGTOK, 01 July: The Land Revenue and Disaster Management and Urban Development and Housing departments have unnecessarily invoked the urgency clause for land acquisition depriving landowners of the right of objection while acquiring land citing reasons like public importance to increase in human population and a paradigm shift of social and economic development from primarily agriculture to industrial and service based sectors.
A performance review by the Comptroller Auditor General of India reveals that in 40 cases, acquisition was done invoking the urgency clause under Section 17 of the Act, without determining the necessity of urgency for such acquisition. In all 40 cases, no possession of the land was taken within 15 days from the publication of notice.
This was further corroborated by the fact that in two cases (acquisition of land for Sikkim Central University at Yangang and acquisition of land and building of Star Cinema Hall, MG Marg, Gangtok) though the acquisition process commenced in June / July 2008 under Section 17, the process had not been completed even as of June 2011 – more than three years since the commencement of the acquisition procedure. Thus, application of Section 17 in all the above cases was unnecessary which deprived the right of the land owners to object under Section 5-A, as per the CAG report.
Section 17 of the Land Acquisition Act confers on the authorities a very extraordinary power under which the appropriate authority is satisfied about the urgency of acquisition of land it dispenses with the normal procedure laid down in the Act and takes away the right of the citizen to object under Section 5-A  of LA.
The CAG report further states that ‘…despite this categorical requirement under the Land Acquisition Act, no such publication of Preliminary Notice for acquisition was made in local newspapers and notifications displayed at convenient places in the locality. The notices were published only in the Government Gazette. Failure to adhere to the provisions of the Act involved risk of illegality in case of disputes.’
It is mandatory to publish the ‘Preliminary Notice’ for acquisition of land from the land owners, the notification should be published in two local newspapers including a regional paper, the CAG report underlines.
The department of Urban and Housing Development, in turn, had not maintained detailed list of applicants till date seeking sites in the notified bazaar areas. However, for selection of beneficiaries, the department constituted ‘Site Allotment Committee’ from time-to-time and on the basis of recommendations of the Committee, beneficiaries were selected from the list of applicants and approved by the government.
In the absence of list of applicants, total applications received, final selection amongst applicants, the basis adopted for selection could not be available with the department, mentions the CAG report.
On the other hand, while allotting site to applicants at Lumsey at Tadong in August 2008, the department (Site Allotment Committee) recommended names of 13 individuals from 55 applicants which were approved by the Chief Minister and methodology and criteria adopted for the selection of 13 beneficiaries and reasons for rejection of remaining 42 applicants were not on record, states the report.
Further, it is revealed that among the 13 selected beneficiaries, two beneficiaries were sitting MLAs and presently holding the charge of Ministers in the State Cabinet and other two beneficiaries were Ex-MLAs. Proper identification of remaining nine beneficiaries could not be ascertained due to non-submission of records and absence of proper information system with the department.
Thus, due to absence of clear cut selection criteria and eligibility norms in the Act, ‘well off persons’ were extended ‘undue favour’ thereby depriving the real and needy members of the society. The selection procedure adopted by the department was thus ambiguous and non- transparent.
The audit further reveals that in one case, two members of the same family were allotted house sites at Gangtok. Former Minister, S.B. Subedi was allotted house site at DPH complex in July 1999. After five years (February 2005) another site measuring 2225 sq. ft. was allotted to his brother Bikash Subedi diverting the land of Transport Department. However, immediately after allotment of site at SNT complex, both the brothers exchanged their sites in March 2005 which was approved by UD&HD after two months. Subsequently, SB Subedi was allotted additional site at the same area measuring 600 sq. ft. in December 2006 and 335 sq. ft. in September 2007.
After getting two additional sites Mr Subedi leased out the above land in favour of M/s Prasant Commercial (P) Ltd for running hotel business in the constructed building. The additional land of 245 sq. ft. and 225 sq. ft. at the same spot were again allotted to the company by the UDHD. Thus, an area measuring 3627 sq. ft. belonging to the Transport Department was irregularly allotted to Mr Subedi, states the report.
Similarly, to facilitate allotment of house sites, land located at various places belonging to Roads & Bridges, Building & Housing, Transport Department (SNT) and Energy & Power Department measuring 2.7256 hectares were transferred to UDHD. The UDHD has diverted the government land for allotment of house sites of 2.7256 hectares to the beneficiaries included ex-MLAs/relatives of MLAs/ VIPs. This indicated that land of government departments were transferred to the UDHD with the objective of extending benefits to influential members of society, the report mentions.
Land measuring 6,600 sq. ft. belonging to the Energy & Power Department at Lower Lagyap, Ranipool, East Sikkim earmarked for housing disabled people which was allotted to 11 persons including former MLAs and other individuals other than the disabled people following approval by the Chief Minister in October 2010 has also came under the CAG scanner.
Even the land initially earmarked exclusively for allotment to disabled persons was diverted and allotted to ineligible and selected individuals. In two other cases, land belonging to Energy & Power Department at Sichey, East Sikkim was allotted to an ex-MLA and wife of an ex-MLA, states the CAG report.
Children Park at Naya Bazaar, Jorethang, South Sikkim was allotted as house site to one individual defeating the very purpose of establishment of Children Park, the report further reveals.