Goenchea Xetkarancho Ekvott
Letter no. /2009 Date: 30/11/09
To
The Secretary Legislature,
The Secretariat,
Porvorim, Bardez, Goa
SUB: OBJECTIONS TO BILLS NO. 19 & 22 OF 2009
Dear Sir,
This is a submission of comments on the Bills no. 19 & 22 of 2009. The changes proposed to the procedural law are acceptable. However, the changes proposed to the substantive law are strongly objected to, as under:
1. The changes proposed to the Goa Land Use (Regulation ) Act, 1991 effectively remove restrictions on non-agricultural use of lands which are vested in a tenant, except in the case of paddy fields. These changes must be dropped and the existing restrictions on non-agricultural use for all lands which are vested in a tenant must be maintained.
2. The change proposed to section 18K of the Goa Daman And Diu Agricultural Tenancy Act, 1964 which provides powers to the Mamlatdars to give “sanction for non-agricultural purpose” must be dropped.
3. The proposed changes to the substantive law related to restrictions on change in use of land vested in a tenant shall cause huge and irreversible damage to the environment of the State of Goa . The Bill No. 22 of 2009 proposes to remove the restrictions on change in the use of lands vested in a tenant, with the exception of paddy fields, in which case the restrictions are proposed to be maintained. The Bill No. 19 of 2009 provides powers to the Mamlatdar, albeit using oblique construction, by virtue of the changes proposed to section 18K.
4. These changes shall cause large scale economic and social displacement of agricultural tenants of lands which are not paddy fields, who mostly belong to the backward communities.
5. The statements of objects and reasons do not provide any objects or reasons for the substantial reduction in the ambit of the provisions related to restrictions on change in use of land vested in a tenant, or for the new powers given to the Mamlatdars for giving “sanction for non-agricultural purposes”. The statements of objects and reasons are misleading as they give no indication that the existing restrictions have been removed.
A brief summary of the facts and the reasoning supporting our objections are given below:
1. Bill No. 22 of 2009.
1. The substantive changes proposed to be brought about by this Bill are in essence related to restrictions on transfer and on use of land which is vested in a tenant. The changes to the present restrictions on use of land which is vested in a tenant are dealt with in paragraphs 2 to 6 below, and the new restrictions on transfer of land which is vested in a tenant are dealt with in paragraph 7 below.
2. Section 2 of the Goa Land Use (Regulation ) Act, 1991 presently prevents every land which is vested in a tenant under the provision of the Goa, Daman and Diu Agricultural Tenancy Act, 1964( Act 7 of 1964) from being used for any purpose other than agriculture.
3. The Bill No. 22 of 2009 proposes to drastically reduce the present unqualified restriction on usage of land which is vested in a tenant. By defining “Agricultural land” as land which is used, or has been used in the past, for paddy cultivation only, the amendment effectively removes all restrictions on diversion of other agricultural lands. Thus, by defining agricultural land as land which is used, or has been used in the past, for paddy cultivation only, orchards, 'Kulaghars', vegetable fields and lands used for cultivation of all plant species other than rice are proposed to be stripped of the protection provided by the Goa Land Use (Regulation ) Act, 1991.
4. The statement of objects and reasons appended to the Bill No.22 of 2009 declares that “Restrictions are also imposed on allowing use of agricultural land for any purpose other than agricultural.” However, the proposed amendment removes the present restrictions on use of lands vested in a tenant, except in the case of paddy fields. Thus the Bill effects a change which is exactly opposite of what is stated in the statement of objects and reasons.
5. The new section 3A proposed in the Bill makes the Director of Agriculture, Govt. of Goa, the competent authority to decide whether the land which is vested in a tenant is agricultural or not. Primarily, there is no need for such a discrimination, since all lands which are having agricultural tenants are presumably agricultural. Secondly, this gives the executive additional and arbitrary powers, which by itself is bad legislation. This shall certainly lead to increased litigation, misuse of the powers and miscarriage of justice. Also, through this ironic and absurd play of words, the narrow and arbitrary definition of agricultural land to be only paddy fields implies that the Director of Agriculture shall be required under the proposed enactment to declare that orchards, 'Kulaghars', vegetable fields and lands used for cultivation of all plant species other than rice are not agricultural lands.
6. The proposed changes to the present restrictions on the use of land which is vested in a tenant are without rationale and are against the objects of the Goa Land Use (Regulation ) Act, 1991. The existing legislation is in fact being defeated by the proposed changes under the guise of strengthening it. It is therefore submitted that the removal of restrictions on non-agricultural use of land which is vested in a tenant must be dropped completely and the legislation retained in its present form and substance as far as the provisions related to the restrictions on use of land which is vested in a tenant are concerned.
7. The other substantive change proposed by the Bill No. 22 of 2009 imposes restrictions on transfer of land which is vested in a tenant to any person other than agriculturalists. However, the term “agriculturalists' is not defined in the Bill, leaving huge scope for misuse of the provision. The following definition is suggested - “An agriculturalist is a person who is directly and primarily employed as an agricultural worker within the State of Goa, or is a resident of the State of Goa who is dependent on agriculture for his sustenance.”
2. Bill No. 19 of 2009.
1. The substantive change proposed to be brought about by this Bill is contained within the amendment of section 18K of the Goa Daman And Diu Agricultural Tendency Act, 1964 . The proposed new section 18K provides powers to the Mamlatdar to give “sanction for non-agricultural purpose” .
2. The above amendment to section 18K has no meaning, unless Bill No. 22 of 2009 is enacted with its current substance. The possibility of “sanction for non-agricultural purpose” arises only due to the removal of restrictions on change in land use proposed under Bill No. 22 of 2009.
3. In the statement of objects and reasons appended to the Bill No.19 of 2009, the amendment to section 18K is vaguely and incorrectly described as imposing restrictions on the transfer of land vested in a tenant, which restriction are in fact already present in the existing legislation. The statement of objects and reasons makes no mention of the implied powers given to the Mamlatdar to give “sanction for non-agricultural purpose”, which is the actual substantive change proposed to be carried out.
In the view of the:
* global insecurity regarding the environment, food and water;
* the critical importance of Goa to the health of the Western ghats – a World Heritage Site and a source of floral diversity of astounding proportions;
* the unique microscopic and extremely sensitive topography of the State of Goa;
* the ongoing displacement of the Goan agricultural tenants, many of whom are still to receive their Constitutional Rights as members of backward classes;
* and a number of other equally compelling reasons;
We sincerely hope that you shall give this petition due consideration.
Thanking you,
Yours faithfully
Shri Dilip Hegde
President
CC: 1) The Governor of Goa
2) The Chief Minister of Goa
3) The Revenue Minister of Goa
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment