SC judgement puts brakes on land grab via tenancy claims

MAPUSA
The recent Supreme Court ruling reaffirming that land acquired under the Agricultural Tenancy Act cannot be diverted for non-agricultural use has cast a sharp spotlight on a long-standing method allegedly used by vested interests to grab land – particularly Comunidade and private lands – under the garb of tenancy claims.

In its judgement, the Apex Court rejected an appeal filed by the Tivim Comunidade seeking to settle a tenancy dispute through an out-of-court agreement, essentially reinforcing that the Agricultural Tenancy Act is a protective legislation that cannot be bypassed through private arrangements.

But the case has opened up a wider conversation in Goa – not just about the sanctity of the Tenancy Act, but about how its loopholes are allegedly being exploited to grab land in a State already grappling with complex land ownership issues.

 Modus Operandi

Senior advocate and Aldona MLA Carlos Ferreira minced no words when he called the Tivim Comunidade’s appeal to the Supreme Court “backdoor manipulation.”

According to him, one of the most misused tactics is filing a tenancy claim – sometimes in collusion with landlords or Comunidade members – only to settle it later with a 50:50 share of the land.

“Some Comunidades in Bardez have perfected this model,” Ferreira said. “They first oppose the claim, then settle, splitting the land – essentially facilitating a legalised land grab. And now in Tivim, the Comunidade went to the SC, claiming it is protecting land, but in reality, it is enabling fraud,” he alleged.

He pointed to the need for the Mamlatdar – the designated officer under the Tenancy Act – to scrutinise such claims rigorously. “When a claim comes, the Mamlatdar must lift the veil and examine its genuineness. Otherwise, this becomes a formula for misuse – brokers put up someone as a tenant and the exhausted landlord is forced into a settlement,” he added.

Legal loopholes or deliberate delays?

Legal experts argue that Goa's tenancy law, while protective in spirit, suffers from a lack of closure.

Former MLA and senior advocate Radharao Gracias blamed the absence of a "sunset clause" in the Agricultural Tenancy Act for the current chaos.

“This law should have included a cut-off date for all tenancy claims. Once tenanted and non-tenanted lands were identified, there would have been no scope for manipulation,” he explained.

“Instead, even 50 years later, claims are being filed. This keeps the door open for collusion between tenants, landlords and builders,” he alleged.

Gracias contends that the loopholes are not accidental.

“They’re left there deliberately – to enable a collusive defeat of the law,” he said.

 Builder-tenant nexus

Goa’s unique land tenure system, particularly the existence of Comunidades – collective village land-holding bodies – has complicated matters further.

In the Tivim case, the Comunidade itself acknowledged the presence of a tenant and sought to resolve the matter privately.

For Andre Pereira, a long-time votary of Goa’s Comunidade system, this action is tantamount to undermining the law.

“Once you accept someone as a tenant, then you’re bound by the Agricultural Tenancy Act. You cannot circumvent it,” Pereira said.

He added that there is a growing trend of collusion between tenants and builders.

“They identify prime Comunidade lands, push forward tenancy claims and try to convert these into saleable plots – completely against the law.”

Pereira believes the Supreme Court verdict should serve as a wake-up call.

“It merely reiterated what the law already says: tenanted agricultural land cannot be used for anything other than agriculture.”

 Implications across Goa

The Tivim Comunidade case is not isolated. Across Goa – particularly in the Bardez, Tiswadi and Salcete talukas – tenancy claims are often viewed with suspicion.

Landowners allege that false claims are engineered by land agents and brokers to ultimately sell the land to developers, often at a fraction of the market value.

The SC judgement, while welcome, may not be sufficient unless enforcement improves.

Critics say that the State government and its land revenue machinery, including Mamlatdars and collectors, must act decisively to stem the misuse of the Tenancy Act.

Ferreira insists that general bodies of Comunidades cannot override the law.

“There is a false belief that a Comunidade, by majority, can do whatever it pleases. That’s not how the law works,” he said.