A VISION DOCUMENT FOR

THE COMPUTERISATION OF LAND RECORDS

IN INDIA

(NOVEMBER, 1999)

Prepared by:

Dr. D.Bhalla I.A.S The Land Reforms Division,

Department of Land Resources, Ministry of Rural Development,

New Delhi.

PART I BACKGROUND OF “CLR” SCHEME

HISTORICAL LEGACY OF “CLR” SCHEME This history of Land Records is as old as the Indian civilization. Maintenance of these records has gone through a process of evolution as it passed through various Administrative Systems and socio-economic compulsions. Without going into the details it can be safely stated that the present system of preparing and maintaining land records originated from the Moghul period and reached its scientific form during the British Rule. All the subsequent efforts are largely revisional with de novo preparations combined by newly accredited areas on the basis of existing laws and rules. Land records are of great importance to contemporary socio-economic imperatives and their revision and updation is necessitated for capturing essentials of changes in social dynamics. The system of correction and updation of land records is very elaborate. Maps depicting land parcels (cadastral maps) are now required to be updated every 30 years through the process of survey and settlement operations. A majority of States have not done any survey and settlement operations after Independence. As a consequence, updation of records has suffered and they no longer represent ground realities relating to ownership and possession. This situation has been well recognized at various fora at different points of time. In December 1988, the Conference of Revenue Secretaries of States took cognizance of poor state of land records and recommended immediate action. Even the First Five Year Plan has taken a note of this fact and its possible consequences. In a primarily agrarian economy with a distorted social structure, has serious implications in terms of its impact on the execution of all welfare/ economic development activities. APPROACH IN PLAN DOCUMENTS: Since the First Five Year Plan, planners have been advocating proper maintenance of land records, as the basis for good administration, aimed at social justice through better implementation of rural development programmes. This was reiterated in the Second and Third Plan. The Sixth Five Year Plan had envisaged completion and updation of land records during the period from 1980 to 1985. To quote the Sixth Plan Document “systematic programme would be taken up for compilation/ updating of land records for completion within a period of 5 years, i.e. 1980-85. In States, where backlog is

heavy, aerial survey techniques may be employed for expeditious survey operations. Each cultivator would be given a passbook indicating his status/ title to description of the land viz. area, cess, etc. alongwith a copy of Khasra/ map and other details that are considered necessary. Appropriate provision will be made in revenue laws to confer legal status on these documents, as proof of title and rights in land.” Similarly, the Seventh Plan document also emphasized the need for updated and accurate land records. According to the Seventh Plan Document, “Land records form the base for all land reforms measures and, therefore regular periodical updating of land records is essential in all States. This will necessarily have to include scientific survey of unmeasured land and recording of rights of tenants and share-croppers which have remained unrecorded uptil now” The Eight Five Year Plan (1992-97) and the Ninth Five Year Plan(1997-2002) have also envisaged the fulfillment of all five principles of National Land Reforms Policy, that is, abolition of intermediaries, tenancy reforms with security to actual cultivators, redistribution of surplus ceiling land, consolidation of holdings and updating of land records. The general theme indulging the content of all Plan documents has emphasized that:

A. Land is an asset, which provides the primary and secondary needs of people. Most of the problems of the people in the villages are due to land related issues.

B. Planning and maintaining land records is a pre-requisite before any land reform policies can be successfully implemented.

C. To achieve this, latest information technology is a must for quicker

storing, processing and retrieving of information data base in land records.

D. Therefore, Computerization of Land Records is an essential step to achieve all these goals especially if we have to realize the goal of decentralised planning and administration as envisaged in 73rd Amendment to Constitution of India.

GOVERNMENT INITIATIVES: The Government of India and State Governments have been seized with the recurring problem, of inadequately maintained land record system as it had

made administration of Land Reforms difficult and had served to neutralize their benefits. A weak land record system had also been viewed as a systematic weakness that has helped the preparation of atrocities upon Scheduled Casts and Scheduled Tribes fora, The following are the major initiatives taken by the Government of India for computerization of land records:-

a) The Conference of Revenue Ministers of States/UTs (1985) advocate that Computerisation of Land and Crop based data be taken up on a pilot project basis as a technology proving exercise in one Tehsil/revenue Circle of each State/UT, as a Central Sector Scheme.

b) A study Group (1985) comprising representatives from Ministry of Agriculture, Central Statistical Organisation and from the State Governments of Karnatake, Madhya Pradesh, Maharashtra, Tamil Nadu and Uttar Pradesh also recommended computerization of Core Data in land record to assist Developmental Planning and to make their records more accessible to people. However Planning Commission considered that it would be premature to take up this scheme at that point of time.

c) A workshop on Computerisation of Land Records (1987) reviewed the experience of different States in Computerisation of Land Records made at their own initiative and recommended that Government of India should fund this programme on pilot project basis. The Department of Rural Development selected 8 Districts in eight States. Morena was one of the districts selected for Cmputerisation of Land Records, others being Ranga Reddy in Andhra Pradesh, Mayurbhanj in Orissa, Sonitpur in Assam, Singbhum in Bihar and Gandhinagar in Gujarat. While approving pilot projects in 1988, the Government of India took the following decisions: i) A time frame for pilot project should not be more than 6 – 8

months. ii) The States should clearly bring out benefits that would accrue as a

result of these pilot projects and these should be highlighted in project reports.

iii) The State Governments should show a clear commitment to Computerisation of Land Records.

iv) An officer with knowledge, training and experience in handling computers should be made incharge of project and should be posted in district chosen for the purpose.

The main objectives of the pilot projects as indicated in Memorandum to the Scheme were as follows: a) Strengthening of Survey and Settlement organizations for preparation of

land records in areas where this work still remained to be done.

b) Setting up of Survey and Settlement Organisations especially in the North_East Region, where no land records existed.

c) Pre-service and in-service training of revenue/ survey and settlement staff and strengthening of training infrastructure for this purpose.

d) Provision of equipment required by village and supervisory level functionaries for carrying out their functions efficiently and effectively.

e) Facilitation of modernization of survey and settlement operations, printing of survey maps, reports, documents and storage, copying and updating of land records using modern science and technology inputs.

f) Strengthening of Revenue Machinery at village and immediate supervisory level on a selected basis to make the work load of these functionaries manageable; and

g) Provision of assistance on a pilot projects basis for, among other things, additional personnel for strengthening of enforcement machinery, setting-up of extra courts for disposal of land reforms cases, facilities and equipment’s, thereby enabling the rural poor and their organization to derive benefits from land reforms in districts/ areas.

NATIONAL LEVEL COMMITTEE. (For standardization) The Government of India appointed a National Level Committee for Standarisation of Practices of Computerisation in the years 1992 headed by Shri K.Srinivasan, a former Secretary with the Government of Orissa. The Committee re-considered objectives of the programme, particularly, in the light of requirement for a Management Information System (MIS). The committee was of the view that while the basic objective should, no doubt, be to grant to land owners the copies of Records of Right (ROR) as and when needed, the objective should be to make an MIS for Local Revenue Administration. Also that diverse needs of different Ministries for various programmes like “IRDP, JRY, IAY, Literacy Mission, etc.”

could no longer be ignored in changed work environment and therefore the Committee recommended a fresh set of objectives, these were:

i) Safe storage of data pertaining to land records.

ii) Capability to retrieve data easily.

iii) Easy accessibility of data to landowners.

iv) Foolproof and quick procedure for updating and maintenance of the data pertaining to Land Records.

v) Capability of utilizing the data for Integrated Land

Utilisation and for Land Based Planning. This in turn assumes accessability of data in suitable micro formats to development functionaries in charge of Agriculture, Veterinary, Soil Conservation and similar land based activities.

vi) There should be inbuilt capacity for extending computerization methodology to survey and settlement operations as well as consolidation programmes.

vii) The software should provide for Intgrated Land

Management system and related MIS.

OBJECTIVES OF THE “CLR” SCHEME:

Keeping in mind all the aforesaid ideas, the final list of objectives of the scheme as conceived in the Memorandum for Expenditure Finance Committee (EFC Memo) submitted in 1993 by the Ministry of Rural Development, was as given below:- (a) To facilitate easy maintenance and updating of changes which occur

in land database such as changes due to availability of irrigation/ natural calamities/ consolidation/ or on account of legal changes like transfer of ownership, partition, land acquisition, lease etc.

(b) To provide for comprehensive scrutiny to make land records temper proof, which may reduce menace of litigation and social conflicts associated with land disputes.

(c) To provide required support for implementation of development programmes for which data about distribution of land holdings is vital.

(d) To facilitates detailed planning for infrastructural development as

well as environment development. (e) To facilitate preparation of annual set of records in the mechanised

process and thereby producing accurate documents for recording details such as collection of land revenue cropping patterr, etc.

(f) To facilitate variety of standard and adhoc queries on land data. (g) To provide data-base for agricultural census. STRENGTH AND WEAKNESSES: STRENGTHS: The pilot projects undertaken and analysis of feed back from these

projects bring out the following strengths of these projects: a) There is a growing realization of the need of the project.

b) It has been amply proved/ demonstrated that there is a need to

educate and sensitize administrators and revenue officials at all levels to impress upon them that computerization of land records is essential and practicable, and has to be done.

c) Practical problems and their solution have been identified. d) In state where the administration has actively pursued the project

with due priority; excellent progress has been achieved.

e) Availability of funds which is often stated to be a major problem is not actual problem, since funds made available were lying idle/ unused for a long time.

WEAKNESSES:

The following weaknesses/ shortfalls have been identified. These pertain to various levels of Administration:

a) Pilot projects were not implemented as conceived.

b) The outcome of these pilot projects have not been systematically

evaluated. c) The report of the Technical Committee which had made several

recommendations were not acted upon. d) The objectives of the pilot projects were not clearly laid down. Some

where, in fact, quite vague. At the end of the day, therefore, qualitative or quantative assessment could be made into adequate efficacy. Even the Technical Committee reviewing the projects was not very specific in their assessment. Some of their recommendations were also not actionable.

The National Level Committee for Standardisation of Practices of Computerisation headed by Shri K.Srinivasan was appointed in 1992. Although the major task of the Committee was : “STANDARDISATION OF PRACTICES FOR COMPUTERISATION”, it left the basic features somewhat unclear. It held that standardisation of formats and information to be computerized was not feasible and therefore laid no guidelines. Te decision of what was to be computerized was left to respective State Governments. The standardization. attempts were confined only to methodology in general and data entry operations. Thus the Committee did not take to logical conclusions what it had provided in the objectives. It can be severely faulted for this glaring omission, whereas otherwise its report was fairly detailed in all other respects. The decision to implement the project throughout the country without laying down unambiguous national standards did not yield good results as can be seen from implementation of the programme in various States. None of the States Governments is very clear about plan of action to be undertaken and deliverables to be expected at the final stage of completion of CLR.

PART-II

REASONS FOR THE PREPARATIONS OF THE VISION DOCUMENT

1. Vagueness of objectives of Centrally sponsored Scheme of

Computerisation of Land Records – Not too much thought had been put into defining in details the quantified deliverable/ outputs from the CLR scheme, For the last 10 years, data entry at various levels has been going on, at a languid pace with no deliverables visualized or defined except the ROR, which also was not available to landowners even after a decade of pumping in funds and time. It has taken so long that the platform ( FOXPRO/ Clipper at most places) has died out without any tangible returns.

2. For Expanding the scope of CLR – To encompass the computerization of Land Records in its entirety instead of just trying to deliver the text database, needs to be done. This involves three parallel activities- (a) Digitization of the Cadastral maps (b) Transfer of existing Database of Parcel information into ORACLE, or

some other such appropriate RDBMS and defining which year data is required to be kept while rest of it may be either erased or left on CD’s/ floppies in DBFs for a certain defined period of time.

(c) Building up of Cadastral maps (in areas where these are not available) by, either –

• Resurveying with GPS so that digital maps with geocoordinates are produced, or

• Converting the data from FMB (Field Measurement Books) into maps, if Survey has already been done, or

• Reconciling the differences in changes occurred in topology

along the boundary (which effect the marking of boundary) of a district/ State, e.g. the course of a stream or river etc.

3. Lack of a well defined destination for the LIS (Land Information System) based on basic GIS-

The detailed process for aforesaid three activities should be clearly defined so that entire country gets on to same platform and every plot map fits together like a jigsaw. The first layer of maps should be done on a simple and easy to use platform for which manpower of “mappers” can be built-up/trained quickly all over the country. Subsequent phases of LIS can be built up on output of First Phase where digitisation of existing maps and survey data can be completed with the help of external agencies/ vendors. This would comprise of core cadastral data linked with spatial data base, which has been built-up by data entry over the past 10 years and is not in the process of being converted to ORACKE at many places. A good example of a standard platform is DXF file Format which works well with most of GIS Softwares like ARCINFO/MAPINFO/AUTOMAP/GEOOUTLOOK ETC.

The platform for subsequent phases may be finalized

subsequently. These phases shall comprise switching over to a “LIS” and a Management Information System. A basic Geographic Information System has to be built-up from Cadastral maps and along with Parcel Database to form Land Information System which shall meet the need of Landowners, Districts administrators, State level departments for land administration, and finally the Central Government. Initially the accuracy of this GIS/LIS will not be 100% but Patwaris and Mappers at the village level along with active participation of Land owners, can work back towards that from initial base. This can be a time bound programme.

4. LACK OF STANDARDIZATION

(a) Expectations from the GIS/LIS –

The Requirements from GIS system, if clearly defined, will give the

State Governments a definite direction to move. The GIS system will comprise of digital cadastral maps linked with Parcel information of land owners, which could be in ORACLE or some other appropriate RDBMS.

The LIS system would takeoff from GIS and be a “Query and

Modify Software” working on an extensive network built initially across each State from the Districts and subsequently tied-up at the office of the Commissioner Land Records and/ or Settlement Commissioner/ Director Lad Records at the State Level. This can be easily done by NIC as

they have done in case of Department of Rural Development’s Schemes in Kerala where they have connected 153 Blocks in 14 Districts. The deliverables and time frame for each of the above systems can be defined so as to enable entire country to move along on the same line and to minimize time and expense in the process.

(b) Software Platform, Hardware and Operating Systems – It is very

important to define standard platforms to be used across the country. The entries process of Parcel date (which is being entered across the country for the past 10 years) and construction of Digitized Cadastral Maps should mosaic together to form the district/ state/ country maps. If different areas are going to be using different platforms of Hardware, Software & RDBMS (Relational Data Base Management System); the maps will be in various formats and it will be difficult to fit them together digitally. The entire advantage of the exercise will be lost just because there were no defined standards to start with. For the magnitude of money & time going into the exercise of Digitazation of Cadastral maps and building of a LIS, it is very important to prevent maps from getting onto such platforms which are either too expensive or for which manpower training across the country is not possible.

It may be pertinent to mention here that Madhya Pradesh has

under taken to work with four main GIS platforms – ARC info, Auto CAD, MAPinfo, Microstation GeoOutlooks, during the pilot stage and evaluated them in detail. Similar review of Pilot Projects across the country is extremely important and will provide a good insight into merits and demerits of GIS platforms being used and help in selecting an appropriate platforms.

The entire data for the past ten years has been entered mostly on

FixBASE across the country though there may be some exceptions. FoxBASE was a suitable platform (from those available) 8-10 years back. With the volume of data multiplying manifold and availability of RDBMSs and trained manpower, it may be useful to shift the data to a RDBMS like ORACLE. The timing of this exercise is important as currently the FoxBASE database is on singly user platform. If its conversion to a multi-user platform is coincided with movement to an RDBMS like ORACLE then the spatial database shall get organized in a better manner and the system will be properly geared up for networking exercise to be done later.

(c) Operating Procedures – A defined set of standard operating procedures in the process of building up of a GIS/ LIS are very crucial to effective implementation of the same. Some states may not be able to comprehend or grasp the requirements and may take off tangentially while others may develop a thinking or their own which may not coincide with what is envisaged for the country as a whole. To prevent wastage of time in understanding & implementing the systems by trial and error, it is a good idea to define the steps or milestones alongwith time frames.

5. Networking –

This is the most crucial part of GIS/LIS to be built-up. As on today

in all districts we have islands of information which cannot be fruitfully used because of this information being :-

• Not readily available at the district level/ village level • Not updated as the centre for entry and updation is

physically far from Land owners • Not entered, as patwari had to go to Centre for Entry and

Updation which was at a distance from the point of storage of information.

Again as cadastral maps get digitized, they will be available only at the state headquarters from where their use will be limited. The spatial database too has to be linked and kept updated. It is very important to setup a network across each state starting from the district level and building up to the State level. Unless this is done, the sharing of information will be impossible and data will remain locked in some pockets with updation being difficult. The deliverables will remain a dream and slowly the accuracy of data will also fade.

During the process of setting up network it is important to define-

• The expectation from network to achieve the GIS and LIS • The requirements for networking • Networking Security requirements

PART III AIMS /OBJECTIVES OF VISION DOCUMENT

1. Comprehension and understanding of implementing agencies especially at the level of Settlement Commissioners/ Director of Land Records is very important for effective implementation of CLR Scheme. The vision document should aim at providing this comprehension and understanding to all.

2. To define the main purpose of the scheme of Computerization of Land Records (CLR). Whether it is just to give a copy of ROR (Record of Rights) to Land Owners or it had to create a Logical Sequential GIS and LIS which will help both Micro and Macro level planning for various departments.

3. Different states have different hardware platforms and operating systems from single user DOS based system to multi-user UNIX system. Even for pilot projects of digitization of cadastral maps, the States and Union Territories may be moving in different directions with no concept of how the whole process will tie-up later as a network. The Vision Paper must attempt to make sense out of confusion prevalent in the States and Union Territories of CLR so far.

4. Monitoring is almost missing in CLR Scheme. The process of reporting from States needs to be improved by providing for tighter well-defined process. The Scheme is too expensive to be left to ad-hoc implementation.

5. To define clearly the constraints in implementation of CLR Scheme and possible solutions – Vision document can attempt to give a glimpse of this and later, a group of qualified people can do this either independently or by clubbing this exercise with evaluation of Pilot Projects in deciding digitization of Cadastral maps being executed in some States. This exercise can be done by a recently formed Sub-Committee which should work under overall guidance of National Committee on Consolidation of Holdings. (Refer Flag “C”.)

6. To define requirements of Human Resource Development and Training for implementation of CLR. Trained Manpower is a crucial ingredient without which even the nest planned strategies/ exercises fail. Unfortunately this is a major lacuna as for as CLR Scheme/ Process of Survey for maps is concerned. A major exercise will have to be initiated to overcome this handicap.

7. To clearly define various phases of implementation of CLR and their implication. Unless the process of Computerization of Land Records is broken up into time bound phases, the entire process becomes too slow to be effective. It is important to maintain speed of work while giving enough rooms for implementation authorities to understand what they are doing.

8. To define all the clients (besides Land Owners) who can benefit from GIS/LIS for the purpose of the micro and Macro level planning.

PART IV

SUGGESTED ACTIONS 1. To lay Main objectives, Phases of Implementation with Costs and other

implication for the Scheme of CLR.

2. To complete standardization across the country of the following-

• Operating Systems • Relations DataBase Management System • GIS/LIS Software platform and Query Interface • Networking across the state from grassroot level at the Districts to

State level office of Director/ Commissioner Land Records • Operating Procedures and predefined Milestones with Time frame

3. To define exact exemptions of the Ministry of Rural Development

(Government of India) and State Governments and other agencies who may need the information from LIS. An illustrative list of such expectation is as below:-

• Expectation from the whole CLR Scheme • Expectation from GIS/LIS • Expectation from Networking • Expectation from the implementers or the executing agencies for

various components

4. To enhance Comprehension/ Understanding of the officials at State level like; Settlement Commissioner/ Director of Land Records.

5. To enable the States to appoint Consultants to help them in planning & implementation at State level.

6. To define broadly the Cost implications for various stages of Computerization.

7. To define key Agencies/ Players external to the Government Departments who would be involved in the process and their exact note.

8. To define the basis of mosaicing all maps to form the “country map”. This is normally done by building in Geo-co-ordinates but since some

States work with baseline method and others have basic infrastructure from SOI (Survey of India) for getting geo-co-ordinates, a standard practice needs to be defined for the country. Currently only village maps can be generated by Edge Mapping but on mosaicing of village maps to form a District/State map does not seem to ne feasible.

9. Actions must be initiated on Parallel activities so that entire system of GIS ties up ad is effective. Some f these parallel activities are –

• Migration of Fata Warehouse of Land Owner’s Parcel Information to an RDBMS

• Screening of Information required from Data Warehouse (as all information for last ten years may or may not be required). It is also important to define “core data fields” across the country which may ne useful for micro/macro level planning from this data base for various sectors.

• Building up of maps where they are incomplete or missing as below:-

(i) If survey has been doe, to start the exercise of Data Conversion digitally so that maps are generated from FMBs (Field Measurement Books).

(ii) If survey is still pending them it can be complete with either GPS equipment or which Digital Aerial photography.

Recruiting Trained Manpower in the following areas – - Network Administrations - Hardware - For Server, Clients, Printers, Plotters, Scanners - Software - For GIS software Platform and Query Interface - ORACLE - Mappers & Surveyors - Train the Implementers Action’s must be initiated for incorporating Geo-co-ordinates so that

all maps can be mosaiced together to form District/ State Maps and later to a map of the country, either by using GeoPositioning System (GPS) or by Digital Aerial Photography or some other suitable system. This can be done with the help of Survey of India/ External Agencies doing GIS work in private sector.

10. Review of Pilot Projects on Digitization of Cadastral Maps must be done in detail for following components:-

• To evaluate different platforms.

• To start listing our Milestones in the process of digitization

• To list the differences across the states and start the process of Standardization for GIS

• To evaluate available manpower and their training needs

• To start defining Operating procedures

To evaluate Training/Exposure needs of Implementers viz. Commissioner/ Director Land Records, District Collectors, Tehsildars/ Patwaris, etc.

PARTV

SURVEY PROCESS FOR CREATION OF MAPS OF LAND RECORDS (UNDER SRA & ULR)

Cadastral maps of villages form a major component of land records. A large number of disputes occur due to lack of proper delineation of land holdings in maps. The inaccuracy of the system is reported to be a cause for exploitation by lower level functionaries of Revenue Departments by manipulation of field measurements. The State-wise position regarding Survey/ re-survey and Settlement may be seen at Annexure I. This information was compiled by Appu Committtee on “Revitalisation of Land Revenue Administration” in the year 1995, but there has not been much change in the position since then. As it can be seen from the Annexure, position of survey is pathetic in all States. Significance of survey process lies in the fact that it is necessary for preparation of survey maps, The process is shown as a diagrammatic sketch in Annexure II. So it is clear that without improving survey techniques and completion surveys all over, computerization of and record will remain an unachievable target. There is inescapable need to strengthen the survey and settlement organizations for early completion of survey. Presently, preparation of maps ad records, survey/ re-survey and settlement operations are time consuming, expensive and heavily staff oriented. The re-survey of a district of an average size by conventional method takes 5-10 years to complete. Publication of final record is delayed even further. Considering the fact that the old objectives of British Raj for extracting from each land owner as much revenue as possible is no longer tenable, it should be possible for us to simplify procedures add thus reduce cost and time. The problems of survey/ re-survey is not uniform in all States and do not allow any simplistic solution. Therefore, it has become necessary to discuss in detail this subject under the following captions:

1) Strategy for operations based on ground realities. 2) Financing of the operations. 3) Technologies and how best they could be used; 4) Continuous up-dating, reproduction, distribution of maps 5) Cost effectiveness of modern technology.

(1) STRATEGY

Survey is an area where there is tremendous scope for simplifying procedures, hastening the pace and cutting down costs. The following aspects needs to be considered afresh for this purpose:- (a) Land classification: At present in some States lad classification exceeds

150 classes. The requirement of these classifications were primarily from the point of view of assessment of land revenue based on productivity. As a by-product, it is now being used as a source of agricultural statistics. With the modern technologies in the field of agriculture, the productivity on land is constantly changing. The present classification do no cater for factors like fertility, salinity, etc. There is a need to delink land records data from agricultural statistics. It is felt that for the purpose of land records, it may be adequate to adopt just 4 classes. They are :

(i) Irrigated double cropped and equivalent. (ii) Irrigated single crop and equivalent. (iii) Dry land; and (iv) Special categories like deserts and hilly land etc.

The substantial rejection in classification of land will reduce the work load considerably and thereby speed up the operation and reduce costs. The State Government should accordingly amend their rules relating to assessment of land revenue. In survey/ re-survey and settlement operations, the emphasis should shift from assessment of land revenue to updating of land records and maintenance of survey marks on the ground.

(b) Stages of survey/ re-survey and settlement. The following arte the three stages:

(i) Preparation of maps (ii) Preparation of records of rights (iii) Assessment of Land Revenue

All these stages can be simplified, speeded up and rendered more efficient. There is considerable scope for introduction of modern technology which is dealt with separately later in this chapter.

(c) Priority for the preparation of maps:- Due to magnitude of work involved, it is essential to proritise the process of mapping. Where survey has been done and survey marks exists on ground, there is no need of fresh survey. The existing survey should be up-dated to improve all sub-divisions happened due to the mutations etc. where survey marks do not exist on ground, or where changes are too many and survey maps do not reflect them, re-survey is necessary. Considering budgetary constraints and acute shortage of qualified. Personnel, it will not be possible to adopt modern technology in one go for survey/re-survey works in all States. It can be affected only in phases over a period of few years. Meanwhile, the work will have to continue with conventional methods combined with modern technologies equipments wherever feasible. Every State should carefully look into the present procedures and try to simplify them. Some suggestions are given below:-

(i) In Punjab/ Haryana and some parts of Uttar Pradesh where consolidation of holdings has been completed, an abridged version of “survey and settlements procedures” was adopted for updating land records prior to consolidation. It should be possible to adopt this simplified procedure in the plain areas of other States also. It is worth mentioning that maps prepared in Punjab and Haryana by above procedure are very good. Moreover the rectangular grid system adopted by them makes it possible to combine maps easily. (ii) Rajasthan and Andhra Pradesh have undertaken a simila abridged version of procedure with the objective of up-dating land records. Other State should also consider adopting this. (iii) Assam and Madhya Pradesh have adopted the practice of placing entire staff of Tehsildar ( leaving out a few hands to attend to the collection of land revenue) under Settlement Officer as soon as and area is notified for settlement. This has resulted in considerable economy and improved the speed of operations. Other States can also use this practice.

(d) Preparation of Record of Rights: Under the Centrally Sponsored Scheme of Computerisation of Land Records, records of rights and maps are already being computerised. It is possible to link these text database to maps through a GIS. This would not necessitate any fieldwork except in case where two sets of data do not match and field verification could be necessary.

(2) FINANCING: (i) Cost recovery: As pointed out earlier, there is a need to have major shift in

the objective of survey settlement, i.e. from the primarily aim of maximizing land revenue collection to that of updation of land records. It is also desirable that the cost of updating be recovered from land owners to cover at least the recurring expenditure. This may be done by pricing information at a reasonable cost. Considering escalation of land prices, the productivity of land and agricultural product prices it would not be unjustified. When land owners realize that under the new system, their records are kept constantly updated with little scope for manipulation, they may not grudge a token payment for services rendered to them.

(ii) Privatization of Survey Operations: In the past there was a need to maintain a large survey and

settlement staff to continue the process of periodic surveys. It has also been seen from experience that present level of staff is grossly inadequate even to carry our routine updation leave alone complete re-survey. Using modern technology, digitized maps can be produced directly. Once created, there will not be a requirement to re-survey, but only regular updatations. This mean that it is a one time operation, But it is also true that States do not have adequate of modern equipment and trained manpower. So, it would be desirable for the time being to undertake the survey operations as under:-

(a) Where no re-survey is required, convert existing maps to vectorised

maps by taking inputs from Field Measurement Books (FMBs), where available or do scanning and digitising. It is also possible to create FMBs from digitized maps. This step is completed now would help in further maintenance of records.

(b) Where re-survey is required, carry out this re-survey using most suitable modern technology. The task should undertaken partly by existing staff of States. But some parts of the works can be contracted out to private vendors at rates to be decided by the Government. Wherever possible local manpower should be used. In this case, Government staff may be given responsibility for field level assistance, quality check and certification. By this way, huge cost of equipment, mustering of training of manpower ad can be reduced considerably. Since the process will automatically produce vectorised maps, the cost of digitization/ conversion will be saved.

There is no doubt that it is a costly operation to re-survey the entire country. However, if there is an administrative and political will, it can be done in three years and the cost needs to be recovered on a yearly basis by pricing the outputs. (3) NEW TECHNOLOGIES: A number of new technologies are available now a days for cadastral mapping that there is no single method which will provide an optimal solution under all conditions. Therefore, based on terrain the States have to decide on an optimal combination out of the following methods available:- (a) Conventional methods, such as (i) Diagonal and offset or (ii) Plain table etc. These methods are economical in terms of equipment and availability of trained manpower. However, it has a major drawback of inaccuracy as compared to modern techniques. These are more time consuming and highly labour oriented. (b) Modern Methods: (i) This process takes lesser time as compared to conventional methods. It is also economical in the long run. The major drawback is that air photographs are costly and can be taken only in non-crop seasons and clear weather. The process does not produce a digital map and involves considerable amount of field work. It is also not suitable for all terrains. (ii) Global Positioning Systems: The system is fast, factual, accurate, simple to operate. However, it provides geo-coordinates on XYZ Plains. This would require to be transformed to the projections system to be used for cadastral mapping. The GPS also need a clear sky and no obstructions like trees, tall buildings, etc. in conjunction with appropriate software, it can produce vectorised maps. It may be more suitable for creating spatial control points across the State from where local suvey can be carried out using other means. Madhya Pradesh has extensively used this technology. Their experience should be shared by all States.

(iii) Satellite Imagery: The present level of resolution does not provide required accuracy for cadastral survey. With the launching of Cartostat satellite next year, the situation may improve, However, the cost of satellite imagery together with cost of processing and associated field work may prove costly. At present level of accuracy, it is not recommended for use. (iv) Electronic Total Stations (ETS): This is an electronic equipment which includes and electronic theodolite and electronic distance measuring (EDM) facility. It provides XYZ coordinates of each point with reference to a datum, which may be any control point pre-decided. In conjunction with a computer it can produce digitized maps. The State of J&K is presently using this equipment extensively to carry out re-survey of the entire State. Their experience may be shared by other States.

(4) CONTINUOUS UPDATING, PRODUCTION AND DISTRIBUTIO OF MAPS: Once a reliable data base is created, there is need to automatically

update the vector data. This process had to be centralized so that at any point of time, there is a single authentic source of up-dated data-base. The administrative procedures have to be modified to implement this. Alongwith this, efficient networking with built in security system has to be introduced. The process of up-dating had to become automatic. For this purpose, there is a need to amalgamate the office of Sub-Registrar and Revenue Administrative Authorities.

It is also necessary and desirable that the valuable data base

created through this process should be made available to all agencies for their use vix. Panchayati Raj, PWD, District Development Authorities, National Highways, Irrigation, Agriculture and number of other agencies needing this database for their programmes. Therefore norms have to be laid down for distribution of digitised maps.

(5) COST EFFECTIVENESS OF MODERN TECHNOLOGY:

The Government of Madhya Pradesh has prepared a comparative analysis of cost benefit comparing traditional method of survey with modern methods. It can be seen at Anexure III.

PART VI COST ESTIMATES

During 1999-2000 there is a budget provision of Rs. 33 crores only for the whole country under the Scheme of Computerisation of Land Records. Furthermore, there is a provision of Rs. 10 crores under the scheme of SRA & ULR ( Strengthening of Land revenue Administration and Updation of Land Records). The pattern of assistance under CLR Scheme is 100% Central grant whereas under SRA & URL it is 50:50, Central: State share basis. Under SRA & ULR very little money can be provided for modernization of survey techniques or completion of survey process as on today. The position of survey process is very bad in almost all States which can be seen from Annexure – I, which shows the position of survey process in 1995 when Appu Committee on “Revitalisation of Land Revenue Administration” got this information compiled. This picture by and large remains the same still for the whole country. This illustrious Committee had noted in its report that “ Survey and settlement is an area where there is a great scope for simplifying procedures and for introduction of new technologies. The functional methods are tedious, time consuming and often not very accurate. We recommend that, wherever feasible, the States should go in for aerial photography. But for scattered areas, functional methods will be better suited. It is possible to use GPS for preparing cadastral maps, which must be evaluated through the pilot projects. An urgent task before survey and settlement Directorate is conversion of maps to standard scale. Instead of investing money in expensive equipment, the State can get this work on contract, through private agencies.” This meager budget provision of Rs. 43 crores is to be used for not only text data entry but also for providing hardwares/ software in each/ every tehsil and also for survey process/ for digitising the existing survey maps. The status of data entry is that as on 31.8.1999, 39% of extra data on an average, had been entered on line across the country. Hardware and software had been provided in 1100 tehsils/ talukas apart from providing it in all districts. But still the digitization of maps is at pilot stage and survey process is yet to start. Also this meager amount is to be used for formatting, Hardwares/ Software etc. for operationalisation at Tehsil/Taluk /Block/Mandal levels. Till now only 39% of data has been captured all over the country and there has been no effort as yet to conceptualise the process/ budget which will be required for building requirements of networking and creation of a LIS for the country.

The Government of India has to provide budget for following main activities (List is not exhaustive – but illustrative), if CLR is to be taken to its logical conclusion of constructing a “Land Information System”. (i) Data Entry/Validation of Text Data of Land Parcels. (ii) Conversion of aforesaid text data into a ‘RDBMS PLATFORM”. (iii) Hardware/ Software for remaining Tehsil. (iv) Digitisation of Cadastral Maps (where they exist) and Conversion of Survey Data into digital platform (where maps do not exist). (v) For Survey of those areas where either survey was done long back or not taken up at all in the past (to be done with modern technology like GPS/Total stations etc.) (vi) For networking requirements to connect small islands of data built up in various tehsils/ districts so as to mosaic them to form an Integrated GIS. (vii) For hiring Manpower (system managers/ mappers/ surveyors/

networking specialists etc.). For training of existing manpower of Land Revenue Departments and Computer Cells in States.

(viii) For extensive Information and Education Campaign to sensitise higher officials as well as users about the system and its significance.

(ix) For consultants/ external agencies for item No. (iv) and (v) wherever required.

It is clear from the above that exact estimation of cost can only be

done after each phase/ task is defined for each districts/ tehsil and its land parcels as well as for networking for forming a LIS is decided. This can be done by a National Committee of Experts (which may take this vision paper as a starting point) with the help of Land Revenue Departments of all State Governments. However, it can safely said that if aforesaid task has to be completed by the end of Tenth Plan-period(otherwise current technology would become obsolete), a budget of Rs. 33 crores will not reach us anywhere. Without waiting for an exact assessment buy the aforesaid Committee, the Ministry must increase its budget provision for CLR Scheme from 33 crores to Rs. 100 crores per year form year 2000 onwards for the current Plan Period and updation of land records/ survey/ process should be made a part of CLR Scheme (100% assistance) and should not be a part of SRA&ULR (50% assistance) Scheme (100% assistance) and should not be a part of SRA&ULR, (50% assistance) Scheme else the survey will never start and computerization of land records never reach its logical conclusion.

Under SRA&ULR, other activities of strengthening/ modernization like HRD/IEC/Provision of Office/Field equipment (new technology) should be done.