By Phrangsngi Pyrtuh
Recently the Meghalaya Chief Minister Dr Mukul Sangma has defended the Executive Order (EO) passed in the month of August on land transfer to private universities on the grounds that such transfers will encourage more private universities to enter the state. It was a subtle defence of course in that by raking up the bleak educational scenario in the state the CM is justifying the need to accord necessary exemption to these institutions. The flaw in such outlandish statement contradicts everything that the rule of law dictates. The Meghalaya Land Transfer Act 1971 relating to land ownership and its transfers has explicitly forbidden transfer of land to non-tribal entities which is the spirit of the law. However the loopholes of the Act has resulted in unauthorized transfers many of which do not attract the attention of the law, purportedly because such transfers are individual-to-individual transfers and the scale of which does not garner public attention. Also the clause later added in the LT Act which says that land can be transferred to an entity if that is in tribal interest. Educational institutions come under this exemption.
For quite some time now the official stance has diluted the effectiveness of the Act and exposed the government. By circumventing the Meghalaya Land Transfer Act 1971 it has also made its intention clear – it would go to any lengths to please private players some of whom possess no credentials at all. To argue that we need many universities to prevent our students from pursuing studies outside the state is superfluous and highly debatable. For sure the state once an educational hub in the region, requires all kind of assistance to catch up but this is no excuse for the State laying out red carpets to private institutions minus authentication mechanism. These institutions operate in complete secrecy with regards to infrastructural investment, fee structure etc. Some of the Acts for which some private institution have been set up were passed hurriedly in the assembly without proper discussion. If we are ready to annul the relevance of an important Act without engaging with the debate of privatization then pray tell us how are we to deal with other issues such as influx and related problems? What contribution have these private institutions made to the quality of education in the state some of which do not even have a proper working office space? Moreover almost all the private universities have yet to meet basic requirements laid down by the UGC though they have been operating in the state for quite some time. This portends bad tidings for the education scenario for which the state government is still found slumbering even though the Commission had blacklisted some of these institutions. This reluctance to intervene amidst the fireworks speaks about the ineptitude of the state government and its inertia to fix the situation which after all was facilitated by compromising the most sacred of our laws- The Meghalaya Land Transfer Act.
The existence of the law is already in jeopardy. Its ability to protect and preserve our land is now fit only for garbage talk following a series of annulments and amendments to accommodate growing private interests in the state. For instance the said Act has been diluted substantially to cater to the mining group’s interest. The latest Meghalaya Mine and Mineral Policy will not change the rules of the game. Land has already been transferred/sold/lease/sub-let etc to various non-government entities by exploiting the MLT Act that was framed 40 years back. Times have changed but not the law, so are we not supposed to change the law in accordance with the times. For instance if our policy-makers realize and for which they are ready to alter the law by providing for backdoor entry to various private institutions then does it not require for regulating mechanisms to be made more stringent for which an independent regulator should be set up to decide cases for/against leasing/ transfers etc of the protected land? Such a regulator of course should be empowered with quasi-judicial responsibility to adjudicate and settle disputes arising from such transfers. Since land is already made transferable the essence of the new law should be on regulation of this transferable commodity which is no longer fixed and which was the hallmark of the Act.
The system of checks and balances while transferring land to private institutions should have become the landmark of our policy making decision but it is sad that one can only think of attracting private players without the mechanism to supervise and monitor their activities. And this lackadaisical approach has pulverized the said Act for which the educational sector is suffering greatly to cite just one example. The organizational and hierarchical structure of most of these private universities have left much to be desired. Granting license does not necessarily imply that these institutions will follow self-regulation. We have seen how this ‘laissez faire’ policy has destabilized the ecology in the mining belt of the state. Needless to say the absence of intervention has led to a complete breakdown of regulation in an increasingly free for all market (read land).
The traditional land tenure system of land holding is embedded in this system of checks and balances which explains why the system has worked so remarkably well for eons. The institution of communal land holding has transcended time and space. The current approach of redistributing land in the name of privatization has only led to fragmentation of the same for which the Meghalaya Land Regulation Act was supposed to provide immunity which is now long gone. The intent of the Act was to consolidate our land not desolate it.
The shift from individual transfers to institutional transfers need to be revisited completely to uphold the spirit of the Act. It is time to open the Act for public debate which was set at a time when modern forms of transfers was not in vogue. The time to intervene cannot be delayed any further. Our institutions (modern and traditional) may depend on it.