A Brief Note
The present crisis in Andhra Pradesh after the CWC and UPA under the chairmanship of Madam Sonia Gandhi took a decision on a long pending issue to demerge erstwhile Telangana (Nizam state) from Andhra Pradesh is artificial. The issue is now concentrated around the Hyderabad city. Unlike many metropolitan cities like Mumbai, Kolkatta, Bengaluru etc, the history and making of the present twin cities of Hyderabad – Secunderabad is different. It has a long story and there are several historical studies that speak about the inevitability of the present situation. This problem came up after the state has settled to look at its formation from four distinct regions of Andhra Pradesh namely, Telangana, Rayalaseema , Coastal Andhra and North Andhra. As long as the regional regulations, land revenue practices and other aspects were allowed to continue there was little trouble. But, the ruling Congress had problems when an attempt was made to bring a uniform legislation that seem to have affected the interest groups in different regions irrespective of the political ideology.
A cursory look at the following Acts and amendments brought out by the TDP government from 1983-2004 ( ChandraBabu Naidu) and YSRReddy from 2005-2009 ( interestingly both the leaders including the present incumbent Kiran Reddy are from Rayalaseema region) appear to be responsible for the present crisis emanating and seriously enduring in the region. The region and the people may be backward, but not the leaders who are the beneficiaries of the Acts and the investments they made in Hyderabad after 1982.
Hyderabad city as the capital of the richest person in the world in the Nizam regime had a different land tenure. The Nizam domain was accessed to Indian union in 1948 and his properties were seized and he was given an annual payment of RS one crore. At the time of accord he had what is called sarf-e-khas, crown lands. About one third of the remaining part was consisted of Jagirs sanctioned by Nizam and abolished after 1950. Therefore all the lands in Hyderabad city by default belong to Government.
In addition to the jagirs, sarf-e khas lands and properties, several land holders and relatives of Nizam left India for Pakistan leaving their lands here. They are called as ‘enemy property’ in the Government of India terminology and in Andhra as ‘Evacuee property’. The Government of India passed an Act, The Enemy Property Act 1968, amended in 1977 and further amendment Bill 2010 is pending before the Parliament. The Ministries of Commerce and Home Affairs look after the issues of the enemy properties in the country including Andhra Pradesh through a Custodian of Enemy property stationed in Mumbai.
The following News item relating to the construction of an International Airport at Shamsabad, Hyderabad in the enemy property speaks about the problem of unsettled litigation of lands of the city. (See appendix)
Most of the present prime lands are supposed to be government lands. But they were grabbed by powerful lobbies and land mafia which is unique in Hyderabad city as they have entered politics to get their lands regularized and become billionaires overnight. Most of them have come from the adjoining Coastal Andhra and Rayalaseema districts. Therefore, the politician cum businessmen cum land grabbers of Hyderabad city turned violent once the central government declared Telangana with an apprehension that they may lose control or a party like TRS regulates them. Interestingly TDP and ruling party legislators were also involved in this scam as every important person and politician in the state owns some registered and some binami holdings in Hyderabad. It all started with ChandraBabu Naidu converting the lands as real estate with the development of infrastructure and ICT. He has regularized the illegal occupation which is against THE LAW of the land that is Enemy property Act. Nowhere in their Acts and amendments neither Babu nor YSR Reddy mentioned about the Central Act which is an overarching Act. It may be due to their ignorance or overconfidence and ambition that they have grabbed lands and regularized in their benamis and some in their own names. It is because of this fraud on the state,some politicians, ministers and Bureaucrats are in Jail. Chandra Babu and his supporting TDP leaders including some of his relatives who are in the Congress party will be introuble if a review is made how the Government lands have been transferred in to the hands of private individuals/companies.A review of the transfer of lands between 1948 and 2013 is necessary to understand the present crisis and to find out a solution.
The present crisis and the demand for making Hyderabad city as a combined capital are raised precisely for this reason. The urban lands of Hyderabad are the most expensive due to the infrastructure developed by the government and the alienation is given free or at nominal price acquired from the poor and regularized in the name of MUTATIONS. The 2007 Act is draconian as it made the Tahsildar to give list of alienated lands to acquire and allot to infrastructure, provision of industries etc.
The titles of some of the Acts are misleading as they are used against the objects for which they are made with a hidden Agenda.
ACTS Passed relating to lands in Andhra Pradesh (they are aimed at City)
1. The AP(Telangana) land revenue Act 1317 F Act IXof 1961
2The land grabbers (prevention) amendment Act 1987
3. ‘’ Records of rights in Land Act 1989
4. AP Assigned Lands (Prohibition of Transfer) Amendment Act 1989
5. ‘’ Public Wakfs(extent of limitation) amendment Act 1994
6. GOMS No 816 dt 9-8-1994
7. Conversion of leasehold as free hold GOMS NO31-12-2004
8. GOMS No 1239 CCLA Hyderabad 3-12-2003
9. The AP assigned Land (Prohibition of Transfer) Amendment Act 2007 dt 27-1-2007 Ordinance made as No10 of 2007
Appendix -paper clippings
Case of enemy property –Lucknow
More than 60 years after Partition, that cataclysmic event continues to influence ordinary lives in extraordinary ways. The Enemy Property Act of 1968 is part of the cumulative legacy of 1947 that the government would have done well to settle long before it got entangled in a web of law suits and communally inspired fears. The legislation, which came in the wake of the 1965 India-Pakistan war, relates to properties that were left behind by those who migrated to Pakistan at the time of Independence and after. Labelling these as “enemy property,” the retrogressive Act gave the government control over these properties, numbering over 2,000, mostly in Uttar Pradesh. It barred Indian Muslim citizens who claimed to be the legal and rightful heirs of the original owners from inheriting those properties. A belated attempt is now being made to set right this historical wrong. Recently, after a series of missteps, the government approved amendments to the 1968 Act, to be introduced in the winter session of Parliament, entitling the legal heirs to inherit the properties provided they are Indian citizens and their suits were settled in court before July 2, 2010. However, the Enemy Property (Amendment and Validation) Second Bill 2010, if approved by Parliament, will resolve the issue only partially. While Mohammed Amir Khan, son of the Raja of Mahmudabad, will be the single biggest beneficiary, having legally won his claim to more than 1,000 listed properties in the Supreme Court in 2005 — the ruling forced the hands of the government to come up with the amendments — the cut-off date leaves out those whose suits are pending in the courts. This category includes many rightful claimants.
Also left out are those who did not have the means for lengthy legal battles. Another complication relates to the rights of those in occupation of the properties that will be returned to the rightful claimants under the proposed changes. It is deplorable that the BharatiyaJanata Party describes the proposed amendments as “minority appeasement.” The issue is simple: the property rights of a section of Indian citizens were wrongly taken away and a limited attempt is now being made to restore them. In fact, the government should have boldly taken this opportunity to change the very name of the Act, which not only projects a wrongful image of Indian Muslims, but also implicitly carries the suggestion that all Pakistanis are enemies of India. As the “enemy properties” were left behind by migrants to Pakistan, not during a war but due to the exigencies of Partition, there was never any justification for the name then or now.
Beat it! Hyderabad Airport built on enemy property
The left hand not knowing what the right hand is doing — this is generally the case in functioning of various government bodies. A recent example of this can be found in the land dispute that is brewing at the newly inaugurated international airport in Hyderabad.
The swanky Hyderabad airport, which has been inaugurated barely a month back, has been built on 5,500 acre in Shamshabad, on the outskirts of Hyderabad. However, it now appears that a certain portion of this land is owned by a Pakistani national, and is therefore under the control of the Mumbai-based custodian of enemy property since 1972. In August 1972, the said piece of land was declared as enemy property by the custodian based on the report presented by the collector of Rangareddy district.
Subsequently, in July 2006, on encroachment of the land, the office of custodian sent a letter to the collector, Rangareddy district, in July 2006 asking the status of the land. No response has been received thereon. In its latest correspondence dated 18th March, 2008, the office of custodian has yet again asked for the details of the land, response to which is still awaited.
Dinesh Singh, the custodian of enemy property, tells ET that repeated requests enquiring about the status of the land sent to the office of district collector have not borne any response. More than 600 acres of land belonging to Mohammad Karimuddin, a Pakistani national, has been encroached without any intimation to the office of custodian. “We have neither received any response nor any compensation for the said land. If any compensation has been awarded to any locals, the awardee has to prove his title to the land”, said Mr Singh.
The airport has been built as a public private enterprise by GMR GMR Hyderabad International Airport Limited. The Andhra Pradesh government holds 13% in the venture.When ET contacted the airport officials this is what Mr A Viswanath, VP, commercial, GMR had to say: “The government has acquired the land on behalf of GHIAL and the land has been leased to the company for a total period of 60 years.” He denied that the any enemy property had been used in the construction of the airport.
Andhra Pradesh government authorities too seem to be unaware of the said status of the land. When contacted by ET, Mr Praveen Prakash, collector, Rangareddy district said he had recently taken over and therefore ET should speak to the joint collector. Mr Jaganmohan, joint collector, informed ET that no enemy property was acquired for international airport.
However, the survey numbers given by the collector’s office included two plots bearing survey numbers 173 and 174 which have been acquired for Shamshabad airport. These are exactly the same survey numbers that the custodian of enemy property has in its records.
Under the Enemy Property Act, 1968, the control of all kinds of property belonging to enemy subjects vests with the custodian.
Presently, the custodian is managing more than 3000 immovable properties like land, buildings, etc. The custodian has to act through the respective district collectors to protect and maintain all such properties. Around 400 court cases have been filed under various courts concerning disputes regarding enemy property.
http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/…ow/2960752.cms
NizamJagirs( abolished)
1. PaigahAsmanjahi.
2. PaigahKhurshidJahi.
3. Paigah Vicar-ul-Umra.
4. Jagir of late NawabSalar Jung Bahadur.
5. Samasthan of Wanaparthy.
6. Samasthan of Gadwal.
7. Jagir of Rajah Sham Raj Bahadur.
8. Jagir of Nawab Ghazi Jung Bahadur.
9. Jagir of late Nawab Kamal Yar Jung Bahadur.
10. Jagir of late NawabShaukat Jung Bahadur.
11. Jagir of late Nawab Mehdi Jung Bahadur.
12. Jagir of Nawab Ali Yavar Jung Bahadur.
13. Jagir of Nawab Dost Mohd. Khan.
14. Jagir of KhajaBehbud All Khan.
15. Jagir of Shujaat Ali Khan.
16. Jagir of Rabat Ali Khan.
17. Jagir of Mir Imdad Ali Khan, S/o. Azad Ali Khan.
18. JagirMirzaSardar Ali Khan, Qiledar of Malkhed.
19. Jagir of Lt. Col. Umar Daraz Khan, Qiledar of Golconda.
20. Estate of Nawab Asker Jung Bahadur.
21. Estate of NawabSuraiya Jung Bahadur.
22. Estate of Raja Krishna Rao.
23. Estate of Bhatambra.
VII. Computation of holdings :
In computing the holding of a person or family unit, each land shall be placed in appropriate class in accordance with its classification as shown in the first schedule in the Act. The extent of standard holding shall be determined as shown in the following statement (Sec.5)
TABLE
| Class of land (1) Wet – Double crop wet land | Extent of standard holding (2) Wet land other than double crop wet land |
| (a) | (b) |
| Hectares | Hectares |
| Class-A 4.05 (10 acres) | 6.07 (15 acres) |
| Class-B 4.86 (12 acres) | 7.28 (18 acres) |
| Class-C 5.46 (13.5 acres) | 8.09 (20 acres) |
| Class-D 6.07 (15 acres) | 9.11 (22.5 acres) |
| Class-E 6.68 (16.5acres) | 10.12 (25 acres) |
| Class-F 7.28 (18 acres) | 10.93 (27 acres) |
| DRY | DRY |
| Class-G – – | 14.16 (36 acres) |
| Class-H – – | 16.19 (40 acres) |
| Class-I – – | 18.21 (45 acres) |
| Class-J – – | 20.23 (50 acres) |
| Class-K – – | 22.85 (54 acres) |
VIII. Enquiry and Determination of Ceiling Area :
TDP alleges large-scale transfer of land
| Special Correspondent |
HYDERABAD: The Telugu Desam Party has claimed that the State Government has lined up proposals to handover 70,000 acres of urban land, mostly in Hyderabad, to private parties against the spirit of Government Orders issued during its tenure keeping in view suggestions of the High Court.
Reacting to the transfer of 37 acres of land belonging to the Government-owned Institute of Preventive Medicine (IPM) to five textile companies at Nacharam here, TDP leaders — K. VijayaramaRao, UmmareddyVenkateswarlu and SobhaNagi Reddy — told a news conference on Saturday that the lands were handed over without fulfilling any of the purposes mentioned in the orders.
Orders violated
They said the orders were specific that the land could not be given for the purpose of real estate business but this was exactly the motive behind the ongoing transactions. The Government did not look at the future needs of common public, particularly urban poor.
They asked if the Government was assessing the adequacy in effecting the transfers. It gave indiscriminate exemptions to 42 beneficiaries in violation of the orders.
For instance, the Government proposed to dispose of the land of Andhra Pradesh Police Academy which was one of the best police training institutions in the country.
TDP stalls House on land transfer issue
Prime govt. land worth over Rs.2,000 crore reportedly transferred to individuals, companies
The reported transfer of prime government land worth more than Rs.2,000 crore to individuals and companies in and around the city rocked the Assembly during Question Hour on Thursday forcing Speaker N. Manohar to adjourn the House for a little over 30 minutes.
The TDP members stormed the podium and stalled the proceedings soon after Mr. Manohar rejected an adjournment motion tabled by them. Waving photocopies of a vernacular newspaper report on the issue, they raised slogans and wanted the government to make a statement.
Beneficiaries
According to media reports, about 65 acres of government land in Hyderabad and neighbouringRanga Reddy district was transferred to private parties through mutation between 2006 and 2010. Reports said most of the mutations happened when Naveen Mittal was the Collector of Hyderabad and the beneficiaries included Padmalaya Studios of film actor Krishna and businessman Malpani.
Slogans
As the members remained near the podium and continued to shout slogans, the Speaker urged the members to cooperate and raise the issue in a different form since he had already disallowed their adjournment notice.
Legislative Affairs Minister D. Sridhar Babu charged the TDP members with trying to exert pressure on the Chair by rushing to the podium. He wanted the Speaker to give a ruling as members were daily rushing towards the podium. Accusing the Telugu Desam Party members of not wanting the House to function smoothly, he alleged that they were trying to derive political mileage on every issue. With the members not relenting, the Speaker adjourned the House.
65 acres
Making a special mention after the House re-assembled, Leader of Opposition N. Chandrababu Naidu sought a judicial probe into the issue. He said that a total of 65 acres worth Rs.2,300 crore was transferred in 22 cases through ‘illegal mutations”.
He said Chief Commissioner of Land Administration (CCLA), PankajDwivedi was asked to conduct an inquiry. The present Hyderabad Collector too conducted an inquiry and held these mutations as “illegal” and sent the report to CCLA.
Responding to the mention, Mr. Sridhar Babu said the government was willing to make a statement whenever the Speaker permitted.
Keywords: land transfer issue, TDP
TRS demands removal of AP government advisor
Last Updated: Thursday, August 19, 2010, 00:28 AP govt advisor, removal
Hyderabad: TRS president K Chandrasekhar Rao today demanded that the Andhra Pradesh Chief Minister K Rosaiah remove Congress MP K V P RamachandraRao as an advisor to the state government for his role in an alleged land scam.
“RamachandraRao, a close confidante of late Chief Minister Y S Rajasekhara Reddy, had played a key role in the scam in land transfer from the Andhra Pradesh Industrial Infrastructure corporation (APIIC) to Emaar Properties,” the TRS president told reporters here.
The scam in the land transfer started when TDP Chief N Chandrababu Naidu was Chief Minister and it grew leaps and bounds in the Rajasekhara Reddy administration, he alleged.
Claiming that the APIIC acquired the land from poor farmers without their consent and that no compensation has been paid to them, he demanded that the land be handed over to them immediately as it remained unutilised.
Alleging that RamachandraRao’s close relative ParthasarathiRao and bureaucrat B P Acharya were on the board of APIIC in violation of rules, the TRS chief demanded that Acharya, who is now Industries Secretary, be removed from his post.
“The state government has appointed a three-member panel to look into this land transfer issue. If they submit the report now, it will go to Acharya as he is Industries Secretary. If he is involved in irregularities, how can he receive the report? So, he should also be removed,” he said.
Asked about the challenge thrown at him by TDP for a debate on what he has achieved so far in the fight for separate Telangana, the TRS president said the TDP leaders should first get their party president Naidu give a report to the Sri Krishna committee in support of the separate statehood,demand.
Alleging that seeds of groundnut are not available in Mahabubnagar district of Telangana region, he demanded that the state government provide the seeds to the farmers at the earliest.
Chandrasekhar Rao also alleged that the management of state-run Singareni Collieries planned to take up open cast mining for coal in five villages in Manugurumandal of Khammam district in violation of the 1/70 Act of the Centre that protects the rights of tribals.
The government and the Singareni management should drop the idea failing which he threatened to complain to President PratibhaPatil, “who is the guardian of 1/70 Act”, and also the National Commission for STs.
The TRS president, LokSabha member from Mahabubnagar, is likely to go to Delhi in the next couple of days to attend the ongoing session of Parliament.
PTI
AP govt amends Assigned Lands Act amidst opposition uproar Published: Wednesday, December 20, 2006, 23:03 [IST] 20 (UNI) Andhra Pradesh government today adopted a Bill for amending the Andhra Pradesh Assigned Lands (prohibition of transfer) Act 1977, amidst uproar from the opposition parties in the House. The opposition Telugu Desam Party (TDP), TelanganaRastraSamithi (TRS) and CPM had opposed the amendment. The oppsition party MLAs trooped into the well, demanding withdrawl of the amendment of the Act while the ruling party MLAs supported the Bill, introduced by the State Revenue Minister D Prasad Rao. Introducing the Bill in the House, MrRao said the objective of the Bill was to empower the government to notify certain areas where the government could Resume the assigned lands and utilize them for public purpose such as betterment of weaker sections – housing, public utilites and infrastructure development. Participating in the discussion on the Bill, the TDP leader T DevenderGoud pointed out that the amendment was against the interests of the poor and it was an ‘anti-poor’ step taken by the government. He demanded that the government should withdraw the proposal of the amendment to the existing law and alleged that the real beneficiaries were the Congress leaders. Opposing the Bill, All India Mujlis-eIttehadulMuslimeen (AIMIM) floor leader AkberudddinOwaisi alleged that the government should protect the wakf lands and distribute the encroached assigned lands to the real beneficiaries. Earlier, the state government adopted a Bill amending the Andhra Pradesh Value Added Tax (VAT) Act 2005 introduced by the state Commercial Tax Minister K Ramakrishna. The objective of the Bill was to exempt the mess charges collected by hostels for students where the amount charged was less than Rs 1,000 per Student per month. Other two bills to amend – the Andhra Pradesh Survey and Boundaries Act 1923 and the Registration Act 1908 was adopted which were introduced by the state Revenue Minsiter D PrasadaRao. Other political parties supported the government’s decision. UNI AP GKT MIR DB2239
Read more at: http://news.oneindia.in/2006/12/20/ap-govt-amends-assigned-lands-act-amidst-opposition-uproar-1166635992.html
