Accelerating Progress In Improving Land Records And Services In India?

Deepak Sanan

24 Sep 2021 7:40 AM GMT

  • Accelerating Progress In Improving Land Records And Services In India?

    Land revenue was a major tax source for the colonial state in pre-Independence India. Updating and creating better land records through settlement operations was, therefore, a periodic activity in British times. These revisions lost much of their rationale in the post independence period as land revenue became an inconsequential tax source and legislating land reforms became a...

    Land revenue was a major tax source for the colonial state in pre-Independence India. Updating and creating better land records through settlement operations was, therefore, a periodic activity in British times. These revisions lost much of their rationale in the post independence period as land revenue became an inconsequential tax source and legislating land reforms became a more pressing concern. The first stirrings of liberalization in the 1980s brought back a tentative focus on a better record of property title. It coincided with the advent of the digital age and the promise of technology to help improve government functioning in various spheres including the maintenance of land records.

    Computerisation of land records began with a centrally sponsored scheme in 1988. Progress was patchy and fitful over the next two decades. In 2008, a revamped scheme called the National Land Records Modernisation Programme (NLRMP) attempted a renewed focus to digitising land records with the ultimate goal of bringing in conclusive titling. The NLRMP emphasised surveys using modern technology and gave relatively less importance to registration, underestimating its role in updating records in real time. The Digital India Land Records Modernisation Programme (DILRMP) introduced in 2015 reduced the emphasis on resurvey and increased that to computerizing the registration process. But it still failed to generate much enthusiasm in the states.

    The last decade has also seen moves to fast track conclusive titling through legislation. A model bill was first circulated amongst the states in 2012. Thereafter, the Centre has tried to keep this silver bullet on the anvil through expert group recommendations and frequent pressure on states to legislate conclusive titling. The fact that conclusive titling requires good property records as a base and even then can take decades to show substantial results, has meant that these efforts have little to show at the end of the day.

    An alternative process, rooted in the possibilities of cooperative (and competitive) federalism, appears to have made more headway in the direction of improved land records and related services. The National Council of Applied Economic Research (NCAER)National Council of Applied Economic Research (NCAER)began a Land Policy Initiative (LPI) in 2019, with assistance from the Omdiyar Network. The flagship product of the LPI has been the NCAER- Land Records and Services Index (N-LRSI).

    N-LRSI was first unveiled in 2020 to bring out the status of all States / UTs on two aspects of the land records and services—the extent of digitisation of land records and related serivces and the quality of these land records. The second edition of the index, brought out in March, 2021, enabled measuring the progress made by the various States/UTs during the global pandemic on the parameters that formed the basis of N-LRSI 2019-20. At the same time it facilitated an assessment of the extent to which the recommendations made to various States/UTs in N-LRSI 2019-20 were considered for implementation.

    N-LRSI has two broad components: the extent of digitisation of land records and the registration process, with a 60 percent weightage and the quality of land records, with 40 percent weightage in the overall index. The extent of digitisation of land records and registration process comprises of nine sub-indicators of which textual records (RoRs), spatial records (CMs) and circle rates were tested on the basis of sample villages drawn from the DOLR website, whereas data on the remaining six indicators was verified either through serving or retired revenue officers with in depth knowledge of land matters in the state.

    The second component, on quality of land records and services, measures the extent to which the record is congruent with the on-ground situation with regard to five components that should ideally be captured in a comprehensive record: ownership, possession, use, extent and encumbrances related to the property. The accuracy of the record with regard to these indicators is looked at through a set of proxy indicators: the process of updating ownership, the extent of joint ownership, land use as seen in satellite imagery, land area in the digitised spatial record and the extent to which the record is required to exhibit encumbrances (mortgages, legal cases, land use restrictions, etc). Extent of joint ownership, land use and land area were tested on the basis of representative village samples drawn from the DOLR website, whereas the instructions regarding updating of ownership and encumbrances, were verified through knowledgeable persons in the state.

    The latest round of N-LRSI 2021 indicates broad based improvement, as 29 States/UTs (out of 32 that have been ranked in the two editions of the N-LRSI) have shown positive change or retained their scores in 2020-21. Madhya Pradesh has emerged as the top performer for the second year in a row scoring above 80 points on the index, followed by West Bengal, Odisha, Maharashtra and Tamil Nadu. The mean N-LRSI score have increased by 16.6% in 2020-21, from 38.7 in 2019-20 to 45.1 in 2020-21. While in 2019-20, only one state scored more than 70 points, there are now 5. Given the significant levels of digitisation of textual records shown in N-LRSI 2019-20, the States/UTs have made most strides in the two areas of making available digitised spatial records and in offering online facilities for registration process. The relatively more difficult area of improving the quality of records has also seen progress although at a slower pace. The average score for the quality of land records has increased by 10.5% from 15.1 in N-LRSI 2019-20 to 16.4 points in N-LRSI 2020- 21 out of a maximum score of 40.


    The most remarkable feature of this improvement has been that it has occurred with no expenditure being reported under the DILRMP. N-LRSI has touched a chord with States / UTs seeking to learn from each other and improve the services they offer to their residents. It has been seen as a credible measure of performance unlike the self-report achievement on the dashboard of the Department of Land Resources. The index not only helps each state to know where they stand in terms of providing digitised land records and associated services, but also offers insights and suggestions that can assist in improving their land record databases in various ways. By ranking each state on the index, the NLRSI has fostered a competitive instinct amongst States to perform better by enhancing their services and processes. The N-LRSI is seeking to add two more features: assessment of client perspectives by surveying respondents among the public and of ease of access and navigability of State land record websites. These will shed further light on the quality of the services being offered. If N-LRSI continues to receive the kind of attention it has from the states, it holds the promise of fast tracking creation of more comprehensive, up to date and accurate land records; an achievable intermediate goal that can confer almost all of the perceived advantages of conclusive titling.



    The author is a Senior Adviser at NCAER and former Additional Chief Secretary, Government of Himachal Pradesh

    (This article is a part of an editorial series by the Property Rights Research Consortium, a network of India's leading academic institutions and think-tanks that produce research on land and property in India, for LiveLaw.)

    Next Story