The New Shillong Township is dogged by another controversy. Government has acquired plots allegedly from a fraudulent owner. It would be fair to assume that the transaction was not conducted in a transparent manner. Not that transparency in land transactions is a strong point in Meghalaya. Despite the Land Transfer Act (LTA), ingenious individuals have circumvented the Act time and again. The Act itself has transmogrified after being bent, beaten and tampered with, ostensibly to open up avenues for investments from outside the State. Large scale mining operations by companies from outside have necessitated the re-calibrating of the LTA. This in itself is not objectionable if the State were to put the Act through a public and legislative debate. There is a case for reducing the water-tight nature of the Act to allow elbow room in a situation where outside investment is imperative for growth and development. Meghalaya is not an island. Pragmatism demands that we give some and get some. It cannot be a one way traffic. If non-a tribal individual or entity wishes to invest in Meghalaya, he/she/they should take a tribal as an equal partner who can offer land as equity. This unfortunately has not happened because those who come to Meghalaya for business have always tried to short-change the tribal partner.
Coming back to the current controversy over the land acquisition deal at the New Shillong Township, it is intriguing that the Government should be buying land without first ascertaining who the real owner is. This is not at all a difficult task for the Government. It could have out the Revenue Department on the job. Government has the machinery to find out who the actual owner of any land is. This is not a difficult task. However, the present imbroglio also informs us about the need for a cadastral survey. Had this been done in right earnest immediately after attaining statehood the Government would have been able to find out from its registers who owns how much land where. Without a cadastral survey and often without written records (since ancestral or clan property passes down through oral agreements), it is difficult to make any cogent claims. Some resourceful individuals will find ways and means of making legal documents over plots of land they do not own, with the help of willing lawyers. Perhaps this is what happened in the present case where claims and counter claims have put the Government on the back foot. If the Government has acquired land from a non-owner it would have to forfeit the plot or plots. And if the land is agricultural land as claimed by the farmers then they would have greater right over it. Is this another case of Government pouring several crore rupees down the drain?