A village officer speaks the truth

It was the year 1976. I was posted as special officer and Competent Authority Urban Land Ceiling for the twin cities of Hyderabad and Secunderabad. The law had recently been enacted by Parliament and there were many areas of ambiguity in its provision. The special officers posted in other important urban agglomerations of the state, and I, were struggling with the need to ensure uniformity and objectivity in its implementation in the different cities.

Land ceiling laws are always a sensitive matter. A great deal of political will and administrative sagacity is called for in administering them. It is always difficult to let go of one’s property. The law, armed with statutory force, threatened to divest people of excess land many important people were affected including the cream of the society such as political leaders, senior government officials, influential business persons, well known journalists and popular film stars.

While all of them publicly applauded the spirit behind the progressive legislation, they felt the pinch when it was applied them. As Oscar Wilde said “Morality is the standard by which you judge other people.” Chief Minister J. Vengal Rao and Krishnaswamy Rao Saheb, the Principal Secretary to the Chief Minister at that time, had provided valuable guidance to the official machinery in implementing the new and complex law.

The process got off to a flying start thanks to the fine example set by no person other than the Chief Minister himself, who lost no time in furnishing a declaration offering to surrender the land owned by him in excess of the ceiling – a substantial plot measuring over an acre.

A semblance of uniformity and transparency was beginning to emerge in the administration of the provisions of the act, together with a modicum of awareness on the part of the judiciary and the legal profession as well as the general public. People owning land in excess of the ceiling in different cities began to furnish declarations showing particulars of excess land held by them.

My father and some friends of his were among the declarants. As a matter of fact, my name also figured as a co-declarant in my father’s declaration. As it would have been improper for me to deal with my own case I requested a junior colleague of mine to process it. Scrutiny of the records and examination of the facts of the case revealed that the land in question belonged to the government, and was not private land at all. Agreeing with the conclusion reached by my colleague, I signed a communication to my father and the others, duly informing them that their declarations were unnecessary as the land in question belonged to the government.

My father had retired as a judge of the Andhra Pradesh High Court. He enjoyed an enviable form reputation both on the Bench and, earlier, at the Bar. Apparently A distinguished jurist and legal luminary had, together with some well known persons, apparently goofed in taking the proper view about the title to the said land! And everyone knows that they had to exercise extraordinary caution in regard to matters pertaining to possession and ownership of land in Hyderabad.

I was to learn much later (from Dr S K Rau, who belonged to the vintage 1948 – the first batch of officers recruited to the newly constituted Indian Administrative Service) that my communication had sparked off a good deal of amusement amongst my father’s friends. They had teased him no end, needling him about how is son had to point out to him the niceties and finer points of the law relating to land matters.

My father, Dr Rau and others were, needless to say, highly appreciative of the stand I had taken. News spread of the incident quickly and I rose in the esteem administrative and political circles. This, despite the fact that I had, after all, but merely done my duty.

After my selection to the civil service and a year’s training at the Lal Bahadur Sastry National Academy of Administration, Mussoorie, I was posted as an assistant collector (under training) in Krishna district, Andhra Pradesh. Coincidentally I was back in Machilipatnam, the headquarters of that district, having worked there earlier as a Probationary Officer in the State Bank of India.

A substantial part of training those days comprised working as an “understudy” to officials working in different capacities. I was understudy to K C Mishra then Sub-Collector, Vijayawada. I recall an incident which took place when Mishra was conducting “Jamabandi” (an annual inspection/finalisation of the land records and accounts of villages in a “taluka” together with a review of the demand for revenue and its collection).

One of the village records was a register in which details of interest due on delayed payments of land revenue were to be posted. Even by that time, land revenue no longer formed a major component of the financial resources receipts of the state. In any case most payments in Krishna district were prompt and the interest, if any, due on account of delay was usually negligible. Therefore the number 17 account (as it was called) was not generally maintained upto date. As a result, it had ceased to be a part of the check conducted by the Jamabandi Officer.

But there were wheels with in wheels. In that part of the state the Village Karanam and the Village Munsif were the two principal officials entrusted respectively with the tasks of maintenance of village accounts and collection of revenue. The Karanam of Devarakonda village was an active trade unioninist and Mishra was looking for an excuse to fault him. He therefore pounced upon the opportunity presented by the failure, on the part of that Karanam, to maintain number 17 account.

The sub-collector reprimanded the Karanam and threatened him with the imposition of a fine. Now that Karanam was among the best in that taluka, and no novice at handling the likes of Mishra. He drew himself up to his full height and said. “If it please Your Honour I seek the indulgence to say a few words in my defence”. Not wanting to appear high handed Mishra nodded to the village officer to continue.

Barely able to contain his fury at being publicly rebuked for an act of omission no longer regarded as significant the Karanam said. “When the Planning Commission of India asks for the number of crows in the country, it is the figures furnished by functionaries such as I which form the basis for the information furnished to it. Do you not think you ought to bear with us in when it comes to such trivial lapses”? Mishra had the grace to appear somewhat abashed.

He mulled over the little speech the Karanam had made bold to deliver. Then, with a slight smile of understanding, he left the matter there. Much is said these days about enhancing the quality of governance and increasing the pace of development effort. No matter how noble the objectives of national policies, and how committed and hardworking the administration at all levels, not much can be accomplished in the absence of enlightened leadership. Those at the if helm of affairs, be they political leaders or civil servants, need to lead by example if the output of the delivery systems is to be significantly improved.