The report of the inquiry officer, deputy collector Agnelo Fernandes, who has ruled that the land in question in Tiracol is not tenanted has sent shock waves through the activist community in the state.
And not without reason. The activist community who were spurred on by a by-and-large favourable Sandip Jacques report and a similarly favourable High Court judgement had expected that there was no way the golf course project could go ahead.
However, if anything, this case is testament to how, if a large section of ‘tenants' themselves declare that they or their ancestors were erroneously entered in the record of rights as tenants, there is little that can be legally done by other, however-well-meaning people and activists to salvage the situation.
By far the strongest challenge against the golf course has been the tenancy issue. The Goa Land Use Act is unambiguous in its decrees that tenanted agricultural land cannot be used for any purpose other than agriculture. If it was proven that the land was indeed tenanted, it would have spelled the end of the golf course at Tiracol.
It's no wonder then, that the issue of tenancy was treated differently by different authorities that inquired into the matter.
The Sandip Jacques report which was the first report to arise no sooner the golf course project secured its permissions and the case was filed in the high court, had ruled that the land was indeed agricultural, but remained inconclusive on the issue of tenancy. This despite raising several questions of uncanny coincidences that the report said had taken place.
The High Court too has said that it was not the authority to decide the tenancy issue and instead appointed a special inquiry officer in the form of Agnelo Fernandes to inquire into the issue.
Fernandes' report was make or break for the golf course promoters. While, the report is bound to be challenged given what's at stake, its implications will travel far beyond Tiracol.
It is an open secret that across Goa landlords and tenants have been colluding to sell the land to third parties through ‘negative declarations' as it is the only way to monetise land that is otherwise ‘trapped' as agricultural and cannot be sold by either
party. It must be remembered that such a process is on paper seen as legal, while clearly being a means to circumvent the Tenancy Act.
The Tiracol case will encourage such ‘collusion' and will set a bad precedent for land use in Goa with far reaching implications. The tenancy and mundkar laws are dear to Goa as evidenced by the protests that erupted the last time the government sought to bring in unpopular changes. It is imperative that the legislature steps in to salvage the situation.
