SHILLONG, Aug 30: VPP’s North Shillong MLA Adelbert Nongrum on Friday slammed Revenue Minister Kyrmen Shylla for his flip-flop on questions pertaining to the matter of lease under the Land Transfer Act of 1971 as amended. Nongrum said the minister’s U-turn on his replies was controversial and questionable.
Nongrum had sought to know whether the Land Transfer Act as amended allows for the transfer of land from a tribal to a non-tribal through a lease agreement. The minister had initially replied in the negative but revised the answer to a yes through a corrigendum.
To another question from Nongrum on whether land held through lease by a local tribal director of a company can be used for setting up a factory in the name of the company where he is the director, the minister had first said no but revised his answer later to a yes.
The minister did the same to a third question on whether land held through lease by a local tribal partner of a firm can be used for setting up and running a factory in the name of the partnership firm where he is the local partner.
Referring to the replies of the minister to the three starred questions raised by him, Nongrum said, “The first matter relates to the strange flip-flop by the minister when giving answers to my questions – first having given his replies in the negative, and then the very next day forwarding an official corrigendum from the government to change his reply into the affirmative.”
“The second matter relates to the answers given as per the corrigendum, which was requested to be treated as the official response from the minister in-charge, and which has turned out to be controversial and questionable in law,” he added.
“So it can be implied by the official response of the Minister in-charge that land from a tribal can be transferred to a non-tribal by a lease deed and it has now become the norm in Meghalaya,” he added.
Nongrum said the reply of the Minister in-charge sends a wrong signal to both tribals of the state who are worried about their land being alienated, as well as non-tribal outsiders who have an eye on acquiring land in the state.
Quoting section 105 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882, he said it defines “lease” of immovable property as transfer of a right to enjoy such property made for certain time, expressed or implied, or in perpetuity, in consideration of a price paid while Section 17 (d) of the Registration Act, 1908 provides that “lease” of immovable property from year to year or for any term exceeding one year, or reserving a yearly rent, has to be compulsorily registered.
“Hence, after a conjoint reading of the various provisions of the law, it is mandatory for the lease deed to be registered with the registration authority in the district and not just by mere registration of the lease deed before the local traditional authority or the Notary Public,” he added.
“From my side as a public representative, after receiving the official answers to my starred questions on Land Transfer Act 1971, as amended I am now apprised that there is the great possibility that cement factories, coke oven plants, and mining operations, and even petrol pumps may not have valid land documents as required by the Meghalaya Transfer of Land (Regulation) Act and other relevant statutes,” he added.
