| Despite state land available, Govt spends crores on private land | | | Peerzada Ummer
Early Times Report
Srinagar, July 2: The government has acquired private land in many parts of the state, despite availability of sufficient state land.
Official records in possession of Early Times revealed that in Budgam, Jammu, Kathua and Udhampur, the district collectors acquired 101 kanals, and 10 marlas of private land.
Such acquisitions have been made for construction of school/college, PHE store tank, medical centre, waste disposal and filtration plant. Records suggest that neither the land acquisition awards contained details of specific requirements put forth by the intending departments nor the indents placed were produced for the annual audit.
Further, 30 land acquisition cases were found finalised during 2009-14 in Kathua, Samba, Jammu and Udhampur, involving the land measuring 1705 kanals, for Rs 37 crore. Scrutiny of the land awards revealed that Collector Land Acquisitions (CLAs) had not factored in all parameters as per the provisions of the land acquisitions act. Also, consistent method had not been followed. Reports informed that in 16 land acquisitions cases, the compensation rates were finalised by taking into account the sale rates for three years, prevailing market rate and stamp duty rates.
In 12 other such cases, the compensation rates had been finalised after taking into account either the sale rates for the last three years or the stamp duty rates only. In two cases none of the above procedure was followed.
In central Kashmir's Budgam, land acquisition cases which involved the land measuring two kanals and one marla, the rate of compensation had been fixed 'arbitrarily' ignoring provisions of the act and laid down procedure of fixation of compensation.
Also, irregularities in the functioning of the Revenue department are coming to fore that the amounts received by the CLA during 2009-14 with the balances reflected in the district treasury office showed that nine remittances amounting Rs 68.69 lakh were reported to have been made into the treasury. However, during the audit, the details of these remittances were not appearing in the records of the treasury officer.
The audit also found variation of Rs 3.19 lakh between the records of the treasury and the collector during the same period. |
|
