No official Railway Board PDF has been traced for this entry yet. The text below was read from the document held in the library.
| Date | 2004-04-01 |
|---|---|
| Type | Commercial Circular |
| Topic | catering |
| Currency | Historical — likely superseded |
divisional level. Detailed review of all the SSE/SE (Works) and all AENs of two selected divisions revealed that no such records were being maintained at the sub-divisional level also. It appears that either the Zonal as well as the Divisional authorities were not aware that these registers were not being maintained, or, though aware of the fact, they tried to shift responsibility Basic land records such as Land…
Report No. PA 8 of 2008 (Railways) 34 Chapter 2 Land Management in Indian Railways 2.1 Highlights • Separate land management cells were not in existence in most of the zones and the divisions. Even in the zones/ divisions where such cells existed, the officials were entrusted with other duties. In some zones/divisions, no training was imparted to officials posted in these cells. Officials nominated as Estate Officers to decide the cases of encroachments under PPE Act were not given proper training. (Para 2.9) • Delays in acquisition of land had an adverse impact on railway projects. Mutation of land acquired was not done with the respective revenue authorities. In some cases, the land acquired for the projects were not handed over to the user departments. Forty one cases of land acquisition processed as far back as five to ten years were still not finalised. (Para 2.10) • Land records registers were not being maintained at zonal, divisional and field levels as per codal provisions and instructions issued by Railway Board. As such, the land holding position reported at various levels by different authorities was not susceptible to verification. Land boundary verification and encroachment inspection registers were not being maintained by 97 out of 212 SSEs offices checked. (Paras 2.11.2 to 2.11.4) • Inconsistencies prevailed in reporting facts and figures on various basic data pertaining to land holdings, vacant land, encroachments, land plans, verification of records with the State Revenue Authorities, construction of boundary walls etc at various levels of the zones. Instances of title disputes/forged sale of land by the private parties were noticed in some zones. In one case in WR, railway administration failed to take back timely possession of land measuring 159.91 hectares from the State government 32 years after closure of the narrow gauge line on Ujjain-Agar section as it could not prove its ownership. (Para 2.11.5) • There was shortfall in construction of boundary wall in various divisions of the zones. Shortfall in construction of boundary wall was attributed to shortage of funds, non-finalisation of estimates, non- finalisation of tenders, failure of contractors and non-availability of material. (Para 2.11.8) • There were 220152 encroachment cases as on 1 April 2004. Though an assurance was given in the Parliament during 1999 that there will be Chapter 2 Land Management in Indian Railways 35 no fresh encroachments, as many as 16109 new encroachments crept in. Encroachments observed in 46 locations during joint inspection conducted by the Audit and the Railway were not shown/ shown inaccurately in the railways records by the concerned SSEs/SEs. There were 26,108 encroachments in the safety zone at the end of the year 2006-07 out of which 1249 were new encroachments. (Para 2.11.9) • 45581 cases were pending under the PPE Act. Pendency of cases was attributed to non-production of required documents i.e. Khasra of land, Land plan & Title deed of land etc. In 21654 cases decided by the Estate Officers, orders to evict encroachers from the land were not implemented. (Para 2.11.10) • The policy of charging of license fee for the land given to CONCOR on the basis of TEUs handled instead of linking it with the market value of land resulted in loss of revenue to the extent of Rs.551.26 crore during the period 2004-07. (Para 2.12.3) • Out of 33504 cases under licensing, agreement is yet to be executed in respect of 14305 cases. There were delays in renewal/execution of license agreements ranging from 3 to 5 years in 90 cases, 5 to 10 years in 2427 cases and beyond 10 years in 16588 cases. A comparison of the land value based on 1985 valuation and the current market value in 55 cases in six zones and Metro Railway indicated that in 42 cases, the license fee fixed was lower than the current market value resulting in loss of revenue of Rs.15.69 cro
Extract shown above; the full text is available in the search app.
Open this circular in the search app · Search all 4,025 documents