‘2-tier appeal system in Bhu Bharati for resolving farmers' grievances
Rangareddy: Making it amply clear that the Bhu Bharati Act was brought by incorporating some comprehensive aspects to address the issue faced by the farmers earlier, the Rangareddy District Collector, C Narayan Reddy said, 'The government brought the Act after certain changes in the legislature.' The New Act will pave the way for inspections at the Tahsildar, RDO and Collector levels thereby to amend the land records which were lacking in the earlier Dharani format.
The Collector addressed the awareness programme on Bhu Bharati Act, also known as Record of Rights Act (RoR Act) on Monday at Abdullahpur Met in the district.
'The land records can be amended as per sub-section 4 and 5 of the Section 4 of the Act. Now the Farmers will have an opportunity to undo the errors pertaining to their lands locally,' He claimed.
'Currently the programme is being implemented in four mandals on pilot basis. However, the same will be expanded to all the mandals of the State from the first week of May this year,' he said, adding that the farmers can avail the opportunity within a year the Act comes into force.
Similar programmes, he further said, will be organised in May and June wherein officials will receive applications from farmers on land issues. Farmers can also be able to apply online through the Bhu Bharati portal.
The Collector made it clear that the land registration and mutation will be done only after proper examining the cases, followed by a survey and proper investigation at field level.
'If any error occurred during the registration and mutation process and the farmers seek correction for the same, they can have the opportunity to appeal for appropriate solutions. The government has introduced a two-tier appeal system in the Land Act. Moreover, if the farmer does not get satisfied with the responses at the Tahsildar level, he can appeal to the RDO within 60 days. If he still feels it unjust, he can have another window open at Collector where he can have another 30 days of time to get it addressed,' the Collector elaborated.
Earlier, local MLA Ibrahimpatnam Mal Reddy Rangareddy, in his address, said that the Telangana government has introduced the new Bhu Bharati (ROR) Act to resolve the land problems faced by the farmers with a specified time frame.
The guidelines were specified through a power point representation during the programme and the details were read out to facilitate the farmers to understand the standard operative procedure of the Act thereby to help them avail the opportunity.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
New Indian Express
4 hours ago
- New Indian Express
Atishi claims detention during protest at Kalkaji jhuggi demolition site; police deny charge
NEW DELHI: The AAP on Tuesday claimed its leader Atishi was detained by police when she went to meet the residents of Bhoomiheen Camp in Kalkaji where a demolition is to be carried out. Police, however, denied any detention. Eviction notices by the DDA have been pasted at houses in the jhuggi-jhopri camp, warning 'encroachers' to leave the spot within three days, or face action. The camp, where most residents are migrant workers, has seen demolition drives thrice in the past year —in May and June this year and July 2023. Despite claims of detention, a police officer said Atishi along with others were 'removed' under Section 65 of the Delhi Police Act. Section 65 of the Act, 1978 states that all persons must comply with reasonable directions given by a police officer in the discharge of their duties under the Act. If someone resists, refuses, or fails to comply, the police officer can remove the person, produce them before a Metropolitan Magistrate, or release them in trivial cases, it says. Calling this an act of dictatorship, Arvind Kejriwal posted on X: 'In just three months, the BJP has destroyed Delhi.' At Bhoomiheen Camp, Atishi addressed the media and residents, saying: 'BJP wants to demolish all jhuggis. Today they are taking me to jail because I raised my voice for jhuggi dwellers. CM will face the curse of the poor.'
Indian Express
6 hours ago
- Indian Express
In Assam, deportation shouldn't be wielded for narrow ends
The Assam government's decision to operationalise the Immigrants (Expulsion from Assam) Act, 1950, to deport individuals identified as 'foreigners' by district collectors — without reference to Foreigners Tribunals (FTs) — raises urgent questions about the rule of law, institutional checks, and the rights of the vulnerable. While Chief Minister Himanta Biswa Sarma has referred to the Supreme Court's October 2024 judgment upholding Section 6A of the Citizenship Act to justify the move, citing legality cannot mask the moral and constitutional peril of bypassing due process. Illegal immigration poses a clear and present danger. But as Opposition MLAs have rightly pointed out, the state government's move risks arbitrariness and the possibility of communal profiling, bracketing innocent people, especially those from vulnerable communities, alongside the undocumented. In recent weeks, Assam has, by Sarma's own estimate, deported 330 people to Bangladesh. The resurrection of the 1950 Act would, the CM said, aid in scaling up his government's pushback against outsiders in the state. The SC's 2024 judgment did affirm that the 1950 Act could be read alongside Section 6A to strengthen the identification of and action against illegal immigrants. But it did so within the architecture of existing laws and procedures. It did not dismantle the existing framework of FTs, nor did it authorise summary expulsions on the basis of a bureaucrat's suspicions, even if the person is listed in the NRC. This distinction is crucial because any other interpretation reduces justice to executive discretion and threatens the foundational right of every individual to be heard. The Northeast, particularly Assam, sits at the heart of a complex and emotionally charged border history. Since Partition and the subsequent creation of Bangladesh, waves of migration have triggered identity anxieties and fuelled political movements, including the Assam agitation of the 1980s. The porous border has served as a conduit not only for desperate people fleeing hardship and persecution, but also for elements that threaten security and communal harmony. These realities, however, demand vigilance, and should be addressed with deliberation, not shortcuts. Even with the institutional mechanism of FTs, there have been disquieting stories of administrative failures. Sarma's polarising rhetoric of flood jihad and land jihad in reference to the migrant crisis, too, has often served to deepen communal divides. With elections coming up in Assam in a year's time, it becomes even more imperative to ensure that deportation is not wielded for ideological or electoral ends. Security threats, whether from foreign or domestic elements or geopolitical pressures, remain a priority that must be addressed with due seriousness. The Union Ministry of Home Affairs' order to crack down on undocumented foreigners, especially those from Bangladesh and Myanmar, has seen heightened action across several parts of the country. But in a region scarred by displacement, suspicion, and historical trauma, the government must distinguish between genuine security action and sweeping administrative moves that could serve political narratives more than public safety. The rule of law demands that the vulnerable — those without voice, power, or access to legal recourse — not be made collateral damage in the name of internal security.
New Indian Express
7 hours ago
- New Indian Express
RTE funds from centre to states need not be linked to NEP: Madras HC
CHENNAI: In a significant ruling, the Madras High Court has held that the centre's obligation to disburse its share of funds to Tamil Nadu towards reimbursement of fees for students admitted in private schools under the Right to Education (RTE) Act is an independent responsibility and it need not be linked with the implementation of the National Education Policy 2020 (NEP). The state government has the non-derogable obligation to reimburse the fee to private unaided schools, and non-receipt of funds from the centre cannot be cited as a reason to wriggle out of that statutory obligation, the court said. A division bench of Justices GR Swaminathan and V Lakshminarayanan issued the ruling while disposing of a PIL petition by Coimbatore-based activist V Eswaran praying for directions to the TN government to begin admissions under the RTE Act for 2025-26. The court observed that the obligation under the RTE Act is independent by itself. It referred to Section 7 of the Act that says that the central and state governments will have concurrent responsibility to provide funds for implementing the provisions of the Act. Section 7(3) also mandates that the centre provide the state government a specific percentage of expenditure referred under sub-section 2 as grant-in-aid from time-to-time in consultation with state governments, the bench noted. 'Therefore, funds payable to the state government, representing the central government's share, towards discharging the RTE Act obligations need not be linked to NEP-2020,' the court said.
