House Committee to probe charge of land grabbing against Taj

Chairman Malhotra notices glaring contradictions in Revenue, Forest records

Ahmed Ali Fayyaz

Srinagar, Oct 16: Taking serious cognizance of the National Panthers Party (NPP) member Rafeeq Shah’s accusation, Chairman of Legislative Council (LC) Amrit Malhotra has constituted a House Committee to investigate whether or not Minister of Irrigation and PHE, Taj Mohiuddin, had grabbed 14 Kanals of forest land in Sedhav area of Shopian in southern Kashmir.

Vide his Order No: PO/HCM/166/LC-2012 Dated: 16-10-2012, Chairman of LC today constituted a five-member House Committee (HC), asking it to complete the investigation and submit findings before commencement of the state Legislature’s Budgest session in February 2013.

While as PDP’s MLC, Murtaza Ahmad Khan, has been appointed as Chairman, National Conference’s Dr Bashir Ahmad Veeri and Khalid Najeeb Suharwardy and Congress party’s Bashir Ahmad Magray have been nominated as the HC’s members. NPP’s Syed Mohammad Rafiq Shah, who had leveled the allegation through a question, followed by a verbal statement on the floor of the House on October 11^th, has also been associated with the HC as a member.

“Whether it is a fact that one sitting minister is in illegal possession of Forest land at village Sadvow in District Shopian; If yes, what steps the Government has taken to dispossess the sitting Minister from illegal possession?”, Shah had asked. Minister of Forest, Mian Altaf Ahmad, had said in reply: “As per the Revenue Authorities, no illegal possession of forest land by any sitting Hon’ble Minister has been established so far in the Sadev Forests. However, Forest Department has been directed to re-verify”.

It was in the wake of Shah’s verbal statement; followed by a 20-minute-long discussion on the subject, followed by Taj Mohiuddin’s suo moto “statement of facts and clarification”, that Chairman Malhotra had reserved his decision. His order on the matter came out today.

“Mr. Rafiq Shah contested the reply and submitted a number of documents in support of his version. He also read extracts from these documents on the floor of the House and levelled serious allegations against a sitting Minister demanding an inquiry into the matter by a House Committee. A vast majority of the members in the House also expressed serious concern and many of the Hon’ble Members unequivocally expressed that it being a serious issue needed my due consideration and an appropriate decision on the issue”, Mr Malhotra recorded in his order.

It added that Taj appeared in the House and strongly contested the allegations against him as baseless. “He also submitted before me a number of documents comprising communication of various Revenue and Forest officers and extracts from the revenue records. Later on, the Minister concerned came to my Chamber and explained his position and the documents he has submitted in the House to me”, Mr Malhotra recorded. He added that during his “careful perusal” of the records and documents submitted by the MLA and the Minister, he noticed several contradictions.

“A letter addressed to the Dy. SP (VOK) by Tehsildar Shopian vide his No. 868/OQ/SPN dated 28-2-2011 states that land falling under Survey No. 4/1 (10 kanals and 16 Marla) and 1162 (3 kanals) has been under illegal and unauthorized occupation of Sh. Taj Mohiuddin, a Minister of the present Government, since ‘prior’ to Kharief 1987. Annexed with this letter of the Tehsildar is a report of the Halqa Patwari and the Naib Tehsildar which is interestingly also dated 28-2-2011. These two documents reflect some patent contradictions and raise some serious questions…”, Mr Malhotra said.

“The report of the Tehsildar reveals that the inquiry conducted on the spot has come to the conclusion that Sh. Taj Mohiuddin has fenced the land in question 27 years ‘before’. The so called inquiry conducted by the Patwari and counter signed by the Naib Tehsildar mentions that it was confined to a so called statement of the Chowkidar whose name has not been recorded. The statements of the Lambardar or any neighbouring land owners have also not been recorded. It also does not reveal the name of the Patwari or how long he was posted in the said village. This so called inquiry appears to be an eyewash. The revenue record annexed with the report of the Tehsildar states that the Khasra Girdawari of the land in question from year 1987 to 2011 is enclosed, however, the enclosed documents reflect the position of the land in question only from 1994 onwards”, Mr Malhotra noticed.

He added: “The annexed record shows that land under Khasra No. 4 is under legal occupation of Sh. Taj Mohiuddin whereas land under Kh. no. 1162 was under his cultivation. There is no mention of his illegal occupation over land under Kh. No. 1162 which contradicts the report of Patwari, Naib Tehsildar and Tehsildar”.

Chairman of LC expressed serious doubts with regard of authenticity of the Revenue records shown to him: “Another document brought to my notice purported to be a notice of  DFO, Shopian raising certain question because both the number and date appear to have been changed. This letter is supposed to have certain other documents enclosed with it as mentioned in it at the left bottom but actually there is none. The aforesaid letter of the DFO shows that he had recieved some communication from the Assistant Commissioner dated 6-8-2007. The letter of DFO asserts that the land in question was forest land. This claim of the DFO appears to have been accepted because there is nothing on the record to show that the Tehsildar had disagreed with the claim and statement of DFO Shopian. Since the claim has not been contested or disproved, it prima facie indicates that the revenue record produced before me is not authentic”.

“There is yet another interesting fact brought before me as reflected from a document which had been purportedly addressed by Tehsildar Shopian to DC Pulwama. This letter which bears no number or date states that the land in question, as per Fard Partaal, has been recorded in the name of Sh. Taj Mohiuddin from the year 1983 (Kharief). It is strange that in one of the documents mentioned herein above the Tehsildar claims that entire revenue record pertaining to land in question prior to 1987 was gutted in the fire, if that is true as claimed, then how is the record pertaining to the said land of the year 1983 Kharief available”, Mr Malhotra has noticed.

“The issue in hand has raised a controversy inside and outside the House and there is a strong prima facie case that warrants a thorough and detailed investigation by a Committee of this House. In the contemporary political environment failure to constitute a Committee to investigate the matter and establish the facts will be interpreted as an attempt on my part to cover up and shield those whose probity has been challenged. It is imperative that Caesar’s wife should not (only) be chaste but she should appear to be chaste”, Mr Malhotra has observed, philosophically.

According to him, all concerned, including the MLC, Minister and officers of Revenue and Forest Departments needed to be given an opportunity to prove their versions thorough an impartial investigation. Second time MLA from Uri and a Minister since 2002, Taj Mohiuddin as well as the first time MLC and Chairman of LC, Amrit Malhotra, belong to Congress.

END