Technology in Land Administration: Justice for All

“We abuse land because we regard it as a commodity belonging to us. When we see land as a community to which we belong, we may begin to use it with love and respect.”

Introduction

Land is the primary factor of production and essential for all economic activity. A vibrant economy cannot be achieved without an effective land administration system. The inability to acquire, hold and transact, in land and property, are major impediments inhibiting both investment in land, and poverty alleviation in India. 1 Land plays an important part in accelerating the achievement of sus- tainable development goals. The preservation and restoration of land resources are vital to tackling climate change, securing biodiversity and maintaining vulnerable ecosystems. 2 The increasing urban population in India is likely to put pressure on land, ranging from 5 to 10 per cent of the area currently used for agriculture. To meet this demand a massive change is required in land use which has to be handled sensitively to ensure food security and prevent conflict in areas of concern like rent and environment, which may cause social dislocation, inequality, and social strife. 3

Land administration in India was a focus of the British because it was a source of revenue and power. The existing institutional structure for land administration was created by the British to maintain control over land and maximise revenue collection. This institutional structure requires a sizable transformation to cater to present-day requirements. This has not happened to the desired extent and land administration in India has not kept pace with changing times. The repercussions are felt in other sectors of the economy as well. There are also indications of institutional failures in the land administration system across the country. For instance, administrative delays are commonplace in delivering services such as the demarcation of boundaries of land parcels and instituting changes affecting land records on the transfer of rights to land. 4 Studies have also documented admin- istrative errors in recording information about land parcels and large intervals between registering land transactions and recording information in the record of rights. 5

India made a spectacular improvement in its ranking in the Ease of Doing Business index by climbing from 142 in 2014 to 63 in 2020. However, this achievement is in marked contrast to the dismal performance in those factors that directly relate to land. India’s rank in the Ease of Registering Property Index fell from 121 to 154 during the same period. 6 India ranks 56 among 123 coun- tries in the International Property Rights Index 2020, which is not encouraging. 7 The high number of court cases relating to land disputes is another indicator of weaknesses in the land administration system. Land-related disputes are the cause of about 66 per cent of civil litigation in India. 8 About 25 per cent of all cases decided by the Supreme Court of India involve land disputes. 9 In the last few decades, the government has realised that like other sectors, technology can be a powerful tool to achieve administrative efficiency in the land sector too. Efforts have been made since the 1990s to introduce modern technology in land administration albeit with limited success.

Using technology may bring efficiency to operations, but it cannot solve deeper problems that require changes in the law, procedures, and the institutional struc- ture itself. Technology, therefore, may not be a panacea for all problems in land administration. Further, the choice of technology, how technology is deployed, and the scalability and sustainability of these solutions, are important factors affecting the impact of technology. Successful outcomes will depend on how skilfully we choose, adopt and implement a particular technology. The use of technology also has privacy implications, data management and security, which will not be possible without the right framework and implementation capacity in place. There is a need for deep thinking that is rooted in reality. Technology has to be implemented through a framework that will help evaluate the use, sustainabil- ity, cost and scalability of the application. Indiscriminate adoption of technology in the field of land administration without such a framework is likely to render efforts at improvement directionless and unfruitful.

This chapter adopts a systematic approach by first identifying some key chal- lenges in the field of land administration. It then examines how technology can be applied to solve some of these problems by reviewing the use of technology globally and in India. Finally establishes a vision for India and proposes a novel principle-based framework that may serve as a primer for governments seeking to adopt technology in land administration.

Challenges in Land Administration in India

Land administration is the process of determining, recording and disseminat- ing information about the ownership, value and use of land and its associated resources. Such processes include the adjudication of rights and other attributes of land, its survey and description, detailed documentation and the provision of relevant information in support of land markets. 10 There are four core functions of land administration which include: 1) Collection and recording of informa- tion about the land, 2) Provision of the land market infrastructure, 3) Delivery of relevant citizen services, and 4) Dispute resolution (Figure 1). Each of these functions entails peculiar challenges which are described in the paragraphs herein.

Land records in India were created mainly to serve the administrative goal of revenue collection. The design of land records has remained largely unchanged over time and, therefore, does not capture many important fields of information about land parcels. For instance, a study on urban cadastres in Mumbai demon- strated that information about disputes on the land parcel, restrictive covenants, encumbrances and easements, are not recorded in urban land records. 11 It is also well documented that information in land records may not reflect the de facto

status on the ground. A field study in three states found a mismatch of informa- tion recorded in land records when compared with the reality on ground. 12 Land records are also not designed to record customary tenures that go beyond indi- vidual land rights. Such information gaps have ramifications on enforcement of land rights, operation of land markets, capitalisation of land assets, and delivery of services by the state. Due to rapid urbanisation, the volume of land transactions in urban areas is very high in comparison with rural areas. Moreover, cadastral maps and record of rights are not available in all the urban areas which are essential to facilitate an efficient land market. Town surveys have been undertaken in very few cities in the country. These surveys were also done a long time ago and have not been updated. Until recently, residential areas of villages in many states did not have a system of formally surveyed land records. The SVAMITVA scheme is now aiming to remedy this.

Land administration is a critical determinant of transaction costs associated with accessing and transferring land and must provide the infrastructure for market functioning. 13 The land sector contributes substantially to the economic growth of a nation. However, the contribution of this sector is heavily dependent on the existence of a stable and efficient land market. An efficient land market requires that there should be clearly defined property rights, minimum restriction on the use of property, transparency in all matters relating to land, a simple and inexpen- sive procedure for the transfer of property, and availability of capital and credit. In India, information about rights to property is spread across many departments including the revenue department, the registration officers, the town planning authority, and urban local bodies. A buyer has to seek information from multiple sources to know the status of his rights in a property and restrictions in the use of that property. It is difficult to ascertain whether a property is involved in litigation because details of litigation generally are not recorded in the record of rights. The procedure to register sale deeds and update ownership details in the land records is cumbersome and lengthy. These factors hinder the development of an efficient land market in India.

Citizen services such as marking land boundaries, granting certified copies, returning registered transaction documents, etc., have been characterised by delays. A study has found that it takes an average of 30 days for a copy of a record of rights and 46 days to complete a boundary demarcation. 14 Some states have enacted right-to-public service legislation setting time limits for the delivery of services to citizens, but these have had limited effect. For instance, a study found that service requests were completed after the prescribed time in some cases. 15

The high incidence of land disputes is a defining characteristic of land admin- istration in India. Land and property matters form a chunk of cases in civil courts. 16 There is also data to suggest that there is a high pendency in land matters before government officials, who are empowered to adjudicate land matters. For instance, revenue cases constitute the highest fraction of pending cases before the Karnataka Appellate Tribunal across five years. 17 The pendency of disputes over time creates uncertainty about the rights of the parties involved and hampers the capitalisation of land assets. A good land administration system should prevent disputes and also provide a robust system for resolving them quickly if and when they arise.

Use of technology in land administration in India

Having identified some challenges in land administration, we now examine the applications of technology to address some of these challenges in India. A brief review of the use of technology in land administration follows:

There have been efforts at digitising land market infrastructure through centrally-sponsored schemes and state-level efforts. In particular, three pieces of land market infrastructure have been targeted. These are textual records, cadastral maps and the registration process. In the following paragraphs we briefly describe the efforts towards digitising these.

Traditionally textual land records have been maintained by revenue depart- ments in states. The digitisation of textual land records entailed the creation of online forms of records that mirrored the physical forms. Data had to be entered from physical records into an electronic database. In India, efforts to use technol- ogy in land administration began with the introduction of two centrally spon- sored programmes: 1) Strengthening of Revenue Administration, 2) Updating of Land Records in 1987, and Computerisation of Land Records in 1988. In 2008 these two programmes were merged and a new scheme, the National Land Records Modernisation Programme (NLRMP), was launched. 18 This programme was again revamped in 2016 as the Digital India Land Records Modernisation Programme (DI-LRMP) with 100 per cent funding from the central government. The main activities financed under this program are the computerisation of tex- tual record-of-rights, digitisation of cadastral maps, integration of textual and spatial data, and computerisation of offices of sub-registrars. 19 As a result of this programme, many states have digitised textual records. 20

In the beginning, computerisation of textual records was done by entering information available in the record-of-rights into a database supported by the Unix operating system prevalent at the time. As records are maintained in local languages, multilingual data entry was enabled using the GIST technology of CDAC. In the early 1990s, the ORACLE 6.0 database was introduced and old data was ported to the new database. A few years later Windows-based operating systems gained popularity, and data from the ORACLE platform was transported to the Windows platform. 21 Later, the data was moved to cloud storage to afford access to citizens through the web portal. These frequent changes in technology are undesirable as every change in technology involves costs in capital and time. Each time a government uses a particular technology, there are costs involved in creating systems, infrastructure and manpower. Any technology change will mean additional costs and extended deadlines. Further, not all offices in a state have the infrastructure to support these new technologies.

In a study to assess the digitisation of land records, it has been found that 28 states have digitised more than 90 per cent of their textual records. But only 14 states have made progress in the digitisation of cadastral maps, with 64 per cent of their maps digitised. 22

Spatial land records consist of cadastral maps maintained for each parcel of land within the bounds of a city or village. This information is aggregated to cre- ate village-level and city-level maps containing spatial information about all land parcels in a given area. The first step towards better land data systems was thought to be the digitisation of these records. Old cadastral maps need to be digitised. Digitisation can be done without conducting a new survey unless of course, there has been an obliteration of field or sub-division boundaries, or if the cadastral maps do not exist, or if there is a sudden development in the area. 23

A map is digitised by scanning and feeding it into a computer to create a raster map. This map is then vectorised by going over the outlines of each plot with a mouse. This process provides coordinates of each point on the map. This vectorised map is compared with the original cadastral map through a process called ‘table check’. After ensuring the vectorised map is correct, other attributes of each of the plots are fed into the software, to create the final digitised map. 24

Initially, states had to design their own registration systems and some states have made good progress. Maharashtra’s pioneering project, Integrated Stamp and Registration of Information and Technology Application (I-SARITA), is a centralised web-based portal to allow citizen data entry, online payment of registration fees and stamp duty, and online appointment for registration. An e-search facility is also part of the system wherein citizens can conduct searches of registered documents. Similarly, West Bengal has developed a web-based portal with an e-deed facility where an e-draft of the registered deed could be made by entering data fields; it is then e-signed and submitted.

In 2016, the Department of Land Resources initiated a project called the National Generic Document Registration System (NGDRS). The NGDRS is a generic, scalable, and flexible software that links all stakeholders in the reg- istration process. It can also be configured to specific requirements of a state. The system allows citizens to calculate stamp duty and registration fees, find circle rates and make an application for online registration. Other features of this project include: 1) An SMS facility to send alerts to citizens and depart- mental users, 2) Links with the land records system, 3) Unicode-based local language support, and 4) e-KYC – a UID-based authentication with biometrics. However, for the final registration, transaction parties have to visit the office of the sub-registrar. The system allows online records of registered documents improv- ing transparency. Currently, many states including Punjab, Himachal Pradesh, Goa, Jharkhand, Andaman and Nicobar Islands, Manipur, and Mizoram use this software.

A striking feature of computerisation is that all three major components -- digitisation of textual records, digitisation of cadastral maps, and computerisation of registration of transactions, are dealt with as independent and isolated activ- ities by states. For instance, Andhra Pradesh has digitised 97 per cent of textual records, but 1.3 per cent of maps are digitised. Rajasthan has digitised only 9.7 per cent of maps while it has achieved about 97 per cent digitisation of textual records. Uttarakhand has completely computerised the registration process but has made no progress in the digitisation of maps. 25 This divergent progress pre- vents the full potential of computerisation from being exploited for improving land administration.

Generally, improvement in citizen services and land administration has not been commensurate with the level of computerisation in a state. This is because this programme places emphasis on feeding the information contained in manual records to the computerised database so that people can be given computerised copies of land records. The focus has been on the computerisation of data available in the manual records instead of improving the efficiency of the administration and giving better services to citizens. Less attention has been paid to changes in the law and procedures so that the full potential of computerisation can be uti- lised. There are, however, some gaps in the computerisation of land records. First, the digitisation of spatial records has not progressed as well as the digitisation of textual records. Further, there is also relatively less importance accorded to the computerisation of registration of land transactions. Only four states have fully computerised the registration process. 26

Second, there are inaccuracies in the information captured in land records. 27 And third, the fields captured in the record are limited and not comprehensive. 28 The fourth reason is that surveys have not been conducted in many states and digitised records may not contain updated boundary information. Finally, while many states have digitised land records, few states have included digital signa- tures on digital records – therefore reducing their legal usability. 29 Only states like Maharashtra have special urban land records which capture information relevant to urban land such as details of buildings on the land.

The computerisation of land records and registration of transactions has largely been managed by the concerned department of a state without the involvement of the private sector or any other stakeholder. The speed and quality of implemen- tation of this programme depend entirely on the will, motivation, efficiency, and capability of the personnel of the department. Dependence on one department has been one of the reasons for the slow progress of this programme. A diversified and multi-layer system involving other stakeholders like surveyors, insurance and financial companies, and local bodies, could have given better results. 30

In most states, there are no record of rights and cadastral maps for residential areas in villages. The ownership of houses and residential land in these areas is decided by mutual understanding based on customs and traditions. In 2020, the Ministry of Panchayati Raj launched a centrally sponsored scheme called Survey of Villages and Mapping with Improved Technology in Village Areas (SWAMITVA) for making cadastral maps and record of rights for residential areas of villages. Under this scheme, high-resolution mapping of land parcels is being done using survey-grade drones along with a Continuous Operating Referencing System (CORS) to provide locational benchmarks with an accuracy of five centimetres. On completion of the survey, a record-of-rights (ROR) will be prepared just like other agricultural land in the village. The objectives of this scheme include pro- viding financial stability to people in rural India by enabling them to pledge their property against loans. It helps create accurate land records for rural planning, calculation of property tax that accrues to the Gram Panchayats directly in states where it is devolved, adds to the state exchequer, and reduces property-related disputes and legal cases.

Disputes are an inevitable feature of any land administration system. The effective- ness and efficiency of a land administration system can be gauged by the volume of disputes, the time taken for their disposal and whether the parties are satisfied after resolution. In India, certain types of disputes like objections to a wrong entry made in record-of-rights, disputes between landlord and tenant, disputes arising out of implementation of land reform laws, etc., are adjudicated by government officials empowered under the law. Disputes related to title, inheritance, wills, illegal sale, the legal validity of a law or procedure, inadequate compensation on acquisition of land, etc., are adjudicated by civil courts.

At present, the computerisation of all the subordinate civil courts, high courts and the Supreme Court is being implemented under the supervision of the E-Committee of the Supreme Court. Courts are being computerised under this project with the system enabling the electronic filing of documents. In many states, government officials empowered to adjudicate land disputes use court management software to dispose of cases. However, this kind of computerisation is not uniform across the country. Even within a state, the use of computers varies between districts. The National Informatics Centre has created generic software for all quasi-judicial authorities, which can be used by any authority by register- ing at https://eqjcourts.gov.in/. This platform provides data on case details, daily proceedings, and final judgments. The portal also provides a dashboard and SMS and e-mail services to users. The processes in revenue tribunals and cases before revenue officials must also be digitised like in higher courts to ensure transparency and speedy disposal.

Use of technology in other countries

Countries across the world have begun to harness the potential of technology in the field of land administration. Following is a review of some of the key initia- tives in other countries that are relevant to India.

In the Netherlands, electronic registration of deeds has been done since 2005. All the papers required for registration of a deed for the transfer of a property are submitted electronically with a digital signature which has the same evidentiary value as a handwritten signature. A European pilot project on cross-border e-con- veyancing has been initiated by the European Land Registry Association (ELRA), using techniques from The Netherlands.

The government of Ontario in Canada, in the 1980s, partnered with a private sector company to pilot the first electronic land registration system in the world. Under this new system, documents of land registration can be drafted, signed and submitted online without the need for paperwork or a visit to the provincial Land Registry office. In British Columbia also a similar electronic system is operational. Scotland conducted a pilot to implement Automated Registration of Title to Land (ARTL) in 2001. After a successful pilot, this system has been implemented in 2008. 31

In Maharashtra, a leave and license agreement can be drafted, signed and sub- mitted online. However, the legal framework still requires transacting parties to appear before the sub-registrar for the registration of the transaction. So while the processes up to the point of registration can be done online, the registration itself requires parties to be physically present. The Registration Act 1908 needs to be modified if this aspect has to change. Also, once registered, transactions are not automatically updated in the record of rights. This process requires parties to apply for updating the transaction on the record of rights. Therefore, if end-to- end digitisation is to be done, legal amendments are necessary.

In Estonia, an e-Land Register system was created. This system allows citizens to access government services such as verification of data, ownership, transfer restrictions, and mortgages. The database allows gratis viewing of land registry documents, authorising another person to view documents and request a service. The data is available to both citizens and corporations. The fields of data include property number, registry, property type, cadastre code, state purpose, location, size, restricted property rights, owner, mortgage, usage rights and pre-emptive rights. 32 In India, while we have digitised a section of the land market infrastructure, the problem of the non-capture of many important fields of information, such as usage rights and pre-emptive rights, reduces the efficacy of digitisation. Therefore even as transaction costs need to be reduced by increasing access to information, land record design also needs improvement.

Traditionally, a cadastral map depicts the property in two dimensions only. However, with the increasing population density in cities, space below and above the surface is being utilised in the form of basements, subways, flyovers and multi-storied buildings. With this kind of development, the need for a three- dimensional (3D) cadastre is being felt. A few countries have taken significant steps in this direction.

Norway and Sweden have passed laws to allow the registration of 3D construc- tion parcels. In the Netherlands, registration of an underground construction along with the surface parcel is possible. British Columbia in Canada and Queensland in Australia have provisions to subdivide land into 3D parcels with certain limita- tions. 33 3D cadastre is being implemented in Germany also. In India, some states such as Maharashtra, have attempted to introduce vertical records. The idea was to include title records for building constructions on the land. Today, because of the lack of vertical records, there is also a multiplicity of databases. For instance, property tax departments in municipal areas have their own set of records for land as revenue records do not map buildings.

Much interest has been generated in the use of blockchain technology in land administration, but very few countries have adopted it. In 2016, Georgia, in col- laboration with a private company, started a pilot project to operate a land registry using blockchain technology. After the successful completion of a pilot project in 2017, a memorandum of understanding was signed between the private com- pany and the Georgian National Agency of Public Registry (NAPR) to operate a land registry based on blockchain. Honduras started a pilot project to establish a blockchain-based land registry in 2015 in collaboration with a private company. However, this project was halted in 2017 and has not been reactivated. 34

The Swedish mapping, cadastral and land registration authority, Lantmäteriet, has initiated an experiment using blockchain technology partnering with other actors in private and public sectors. This experiment was initiated in 2015 and has been completed in 2019, but is still not in use. 35 In a few countries like Ukraine, Brazil, Estonia, and Ghana, the adoption of this technology is being considered. In India, Andhra Pradesh is attempting to introduce blockchain technology to land transactions. While the theoretical idea of using blockchain is sound, the reality is that we have limited state capacity to understand or implement it. Implementation of blockchain-based registration requires a high amount of capacity which includes the supporting infrastructure to run such systems, pro- tocols to protect the system, and the human capability to create and oversee the system.

In the last few decades, there has been a proliferation of efforts aimed at intro- ducing online dispute resolution. These platforms use technology to improve and increase access to dispute resolution services for citizens. Property disputes and housing disputes have been included in these efforts. Online dispute plat- forms may be government-run, court-annexed or private. For instance, the Civil Resolution Tribunal in British Columbia 36 conducts an end-to-end dispute reso- lution process for disputes including those related to housing and property. The Smartsettle platform in the United States is a private platform on which disputes including real estate ones can be settled. 37 Introducing online dispute resolution in forums that examine land matters has two main advantages. Online dispute resolution means that people who were previously physically away from these forums can now access them with ease. First, it will improve access to justice, and second, an online resolution has the potential to reduce the costs of litigation as parties do not need to make physical fillings or be physically present for hearings.

With growing urbanisation, the commercial requirement for land is increasing resulting in a demand for speed and quality in land-related services. To meet the demand for services, land administration systems need to be reformed by using new technology, better institutional infrastructure, and simplified procedures, among others. Many countries have partnered with the private sector to bring investment, technology and efficiency to the system. These are discussed in the following paragraphs.

The Ontario province in Canada has been successfully running a land regis- tration system on the Public-Private Partnership (PPP) model. It commenced in 1992 for a 25-year period which has now been extended until 2067. This experi- ment has been very successful and is referred to as the gold standard in this sector. New South Wales and the southern states of Australia also operate very effective land registries using contemporary information technology infrastructure on the PPP model . 38

In Denmark, chartered surveyors work on cadastral maps in surveying changes in the boundaries, demarcating boundaries on the ground, and mediating in case of boundary disputes among neighbours. However, changes in the cadastre are made only after the proposal for changes prepared by the chartered surveyor is approved by the Danish Geodata Agency. This agency also regulates the profession of chartered surveyors by issuing licenses under the provisions of the Chartered Surveyors Act. The system of private chartered surveyors is an excellent example of public-private cooperation, which takes away much of the load of routine sur- vey work from government officials ensuring quicker and better service for the public. 39

In Switzerland, an innovative approach was adopted at the initiative of the private sector. The private sector integrated restrictions imposed by public laws with the cadastral data. They recovered their cost by providing this information to the public for a fee. Later the government stepped in to provide a legal basis for integrating Public Law Restrictions (PLR) into the cadastre by enacting the ‘Act on Geoinformation’ in 2007. Now as many as 17 PLR are recorded in the cadastre in Switzerland. 40

To enable private sector participation in India, we need to examine how we can incentivise private parties to engage with the government. The administration has to be willing to engage with private parties rather than go it themselves. This will also require us to examine public procurement processes and contracting to iden- tify if any barriers prevent private parties from engaging with the government. For instance, under the SVAMITVA scheme, drone survey services were successfully procured from private parties by state governments. Following is a study on the process involved and the lessons we can draw from this experience.

A Vision for Technology in Land Administration in India

In light of our review of global best practices on technology-based interventions and the contextual reality in India, we set out a vision for land administration in India.

In India, urban centres are growing quickly and most land transactions take place in urban areas. As mentioned earlier, a huge gap exists with respect to the avail- ability of a record of rights in urban areas. Though state laws mandate the making and updating of record-of-rights in urban areas as well as rural areas, 41 in many cities cadastral surveys to make record-of-rights are yet to take place. In some urban areas which have been formed by reclassifying rural areas, old cadastral maps and record-of-rights do exist, but have not been updated for a variety of reasons including lack of manpower, and unsuitable formats of record-of-rights for urban areas.

The record-of-rights is an authentic source of rights over property in rural areas because of the concept of presumption of truth attached to an entry in the record of rights. The non-availability of record-of-rights in urban areas makes it difficult to verify the right holders and boundaries of an urban property with certainty. This uncertainty during transactions of urban property puts a brake on the free operation of land markets and gives rise to litigation.

While it is of utmost importance to improve record-of-rights in urban areas, the traditional approach adopted in rural areas under the DILRMP is not suitable for urban areas. Depending only on the revenue department will prolong the process excessively as has happened in rural areas. In an urban area, information about rights in property and boundaries should be parallelly sourced from multiple agencies like the revenue department, the registrar of deeds, the Survey of India, the National Remote Sensing Centre, the urban-local body, planning authority, banking institutions, property owners, and tenants. Formats for recording infor- mation in record-of-rights should also be redesigned to make these relevant for urban areas.

With the use of suitable technology, information received from different sources can be collated expeditiously to make the first version of the cadastral map and record of rights. The remaining gaps can be plugged in gradually as more accurate information becomes available. Wherever an accurate survey of boundaries is not available, a record of rights can be made and the system of general boundaries may be followed. In this system, followed by many countries, the boundaries of a land parcel are not precisely determined in the cadastre. 42 Where ownership is ambiguous or disputed, provisional records may be made and concerned parties advised to settle their dispute by arbitration or litigation.

To ensure that such newly made record-of-rights remains updated, it should be made mandatory that the transaction deed should describe the property as per the entry in the record-of-rights. If the ownership of a seller is not recorded in the record of rights, he should be advised to get the mutation done before the property is transferred. If the map of the property proposed to be transferred is not available, the parties should be advised to get an accurate survey done through an approved surveyor and the map should then be attached with the deed. By using suitable technology, such standalone maps can be collated into a cadastral map of an area. This methodology is followed in Australia where cadastre is not made. Every land parcel is surveyed individually, and a map is attached with the title records, for future reference. 43

Traditionally a cadastral map depicts the property in two dimensions only. HA three-dimensional 3-D visualisation of space is very useful for urban planning, assessing the energy requirement, tax assessment and making plans for rescue and evacuation in case of a disaster. With technological advancements, it is possible to represent a property in three dimensions. As mentioned earlier, many countries have started making three-dimensional cadastres, and India must do so as well.

In India, two separate agencies are involved in keeping records of the legal rights of people over land. While deeds relating to the transfer of rights in property are registered with the registrar under the Registration Act, land parcel ownership records and cadastral maps are maintained by the revenue department of the concerned state. Many European countries also have separate agencies for the registration of transactions and maintenance of cadastre.

The Netherlands entrusted the management of cadastre and land registration to a single agency as early as 1927. 44 Because of large discrepancies between the Land Registry and Cadastral maps, Hungary also created a Unified Land Registry in 1972. 45 Countries like Sweden, Ireland, Romania, Macedonia, and Lithuania, have opted for a single agency for both operations. 46 The merger of two agencies involves many intricate legal and administrative issues which are difficult to manage. However, by using technology, the two agencies can be integrated. At present two separate databases are being created for deed registra- tion and record-of-rights. If a single database is created for both agencies or if the two databases are seamlessly linked, we can reap the benefits of the merger without doing so physically. The plot number given to a parcel of land in the record-of-rights should be the single parameter to search the database of the registry as well as the record-of-rights. An integrated search should be available on both databases through a common portal. Everyone should have access to databases of the registry as well as record-of-rights to know the status of rights on a property.

Also, details of the transfer deed should appear in the record of rights against the relevant parcel number as a remark, until the record of rights is updated. This will ensure that anyone taking a copy of the record of rights will come to know about the latest transactions including sales and mortgages even if the mutation is not sanctioned by then. This will also allow lenders to assess risk effectively while valuing properties against mortgages or loans. In the larger scheme of things, this may also help prevent disputes as transacting parties will be aware of encum- brances on the property before the transaction.

Computerisation should have resulted in greater accessibility to land records, but unfortunately, that has not happened. It is time to change the traditional policy of restricted access to land records for the landowner and other stakeholders. The full impact of computerisation will be visible only when the data is easily accessible to multiple stakeholders like landowners, lawyers, courts, government authorities and the private sector.

A landowner should be given control over his land record just as he does over his bank account. By logging in to his account he should be able to see details of his land in any village or city in any state. He should also be allowed to update his address, phone number, e-mail address etc., by submitting appropriate documents for verification. All summons, notices etc., can be sent to him at his updated address. Through his account, landowners should be allowed to download legal copies, authorise people person to see his record, file an application of mutation, raise an objection to a wrong entry and submit a deed for registration. He should also get an automatic alert through SMS or e-mail regarding any activity initiated by a government authority or a private person with respect to his land so that he may safeguard his interests.

A landowner should be able to submit details of his land electronically through his account to various agencies like urban local bodies, planning authorities, lending institutions, tax authorities, revenue officers etc., for availing services from them. These agencies should have access to record-of-rights to verify the data submitted by a person. The landowner should have the option to authorise professionals like architects, town planners, engineers, lawyers etc., to access his records for advice, if needed.

Recently, the Centre has declared a liberal policy regarding Geospatial Data Services. 47 Under this policy, geospatial data using public funds shall be made available to the private sector at a fair price. Similarly, data on cadastral maps and records of rights should be made available to selected private agencies for developing applications to provide land-related services to the public, government departments and other stakeholders. This should be done without compromising the data security and right to privacy of individuals.

Investment of effort, time and money in georeferencing of existing maps is jus- tified only if these are used by various government agencies, the private sector, and the public for different purposes. This is possible by upgrading the existing cadastre into a multipurpose cadastre by adding additional layers of information to the base map. A multipurpose cadastre can be created easily if government agencies are given access to the georeferenced base map created by the revenue department, and are allowed to add layers of attributes related to the land. The private sector will also be interested in creating such multi-purpose maps because they may be able to recover their investment through users who use the data.

Presently, restrictions imposed on the right of a landowner by an order of a court or any other authority is not documented in the land records. Restrictions on the use of land under laws related to town planning, environment etc., also do not appear on records. Recording of such encumbrances is necessary to facilitate efficient land markets in the country. Any order of a court affecting rights in a property, restrictions imposed by any public authority on any land, notifications regarding land acquisition, orders of any authority affecting land like a grant, allotment, cancellation of allotment, partition, etc., should be recorded in the land records. It is suggested that authorities and courts may be given limited access to the database of record-of-rights to upload details of such orders by fol- lowing a prescribed procedure. Adequate safeguards against any manipulation of data should be built into the system.

Another lacuna is the limited use of technology for dispute resolution. The authors’ survey of websites of revenue tribunals and anecdotal data from experts suggest that the use of technology for the disposal of land-related disputes is limited. While information about the status of cases can be viewed online in states like Karnataka, Maharashtra, and Bihar, the filing of cases and hearings, are done physically. We must consider using technology to increase the speed of these processes in their quasi-judicial forums.

Online Dispute Resolution (ODR) should be adopted to resolve disputes wherever possible. 48 Cases before revenue officers and tribunals can be handled using the ODR methodology because most cases are decided based on documen- tary evidence. If the use of ODR for deciding land-related disputes is adopted as a policy by state governments, it will have a major impact on the pendency of cases. In many countries, online dispute resolution platforms have been created where the end-to-end process of adjudication takes place online. This reduces the time and cost of dispute resolution and also increases access to these forums for citizens. For instance, the British Columbia Civil Resolution Tribunal (CRT) takes up cases of strata property of any amount, where the entire process of dis- pute resolution is online. The decisions taken by the CRT are binding and can be enforced like a court order. 49

At present, projects for the introduction of new technology are mostly driven by the government with limited reliance on the private sector. For the successful implementation of schemes, the state must consider partnering with the private sector. A partnership with the private sector would attract investment, technology, and speedy implementation, all lacking now. There are many examples of suc- cessful implementation of large-size projects in India on the PPP model. Issuing passports in India was transformed with a successful PPP implemented by the Ministry of External Affairs. Similarly, Aadhar has been successfully implemented in partnership with private parties.

A Framework for Evaluating Technology-driven Solutions in Land Administration

Our learnings so far indicate that there are currently several technology-driven programmes under implementation in the field of land administration in India. There also appears to be a growing effort towards the adoption of new technology in more areas in this sector. It is therefore important to establish a framework for using technology in land administration. What follows is a framework in the form of a ‘Six-S checklist’ for evaluating technology before its adoption.

This novel framework is designed as a checklist for states seeking to introduce new technology in the field of land administration. It consists of six parameters, each with a series of questions that have been designed by us, to evaluate whether a given technology is fit for a purpose. Our framework is proposed as a checklist and not a scoring mechanism. Our intent is to provide a checklist for evaluation that will guide government officials while evaluating the adoption and use of technology to address an administrative challenge. The framework checklist is to be administered as a whole even though each parameter is standalone and can be assessed independently. To create this framework, we build on our learnings from technology-driven efforts in the field of land administration in India and other countries, as well as from available literature on the use of technology in the field of public administration.

Our framework consists of six main parameters, each used to evaluate any technological solution proposed to solve a challenge in the field of land administration.

1. Parameter 1: Suitability: The suitability assessment is aimed at evaluating whether the proposed technological solution is appropriate for the specific purpose for which it is being considered. The questions under the suitabil- ity assessment parameter are designed to guide the government officer in three main areas (i) Identifying the precise land administration challenge and the citizen-centric outcome to be achieved, (ii) Identifying if and how these objectives will be achieved using this technology, and (iii) Identifying whether the proposed technology is appropriate in the current context of laws, rules, administrative system design, and capacity.

For instance, a study finds that digitisation of land records may not translate into better access to formal finance, despite access being one of the socio-economic aims of land record modernisation programmes. 50 Therefore, while records may have been digitised and administrative pro- cesses integrated, they may have a limited impact on citizens. Knowing the limitations of technological interventions is essential for setting realistic goals for policies.

2. Parameter 2: Scalability: The scalability assessment is aimed at evaluating whether the proposed technological solution can be expanded and applied to all administrative offices in a state or region. The questions under this parameter have been designed to guide the government officer in three main areas (i) Identifying the gap between the current state of technological infra- structure in administrative offices and the infrastructure required to support the proposed technology, (ii) Identifying the gap between the current state of capacity and technical knowhow in administrative offices and the capac- ity and technical know-how required to operate and maintain the proposed technology, and (iii) Identifying the cost and time required to bridge these gaps for the implementation of the technological solution.

For instance, field studies have documented basic infrastructure failures such as electricity outages, server breakdowns and the lack of technical teams to fix them. The lack of computer systems in administration offices in some villages also limits the implementation of the DILRMP. 51 In some places using technology may be less effective because of limitations in infra- structure.

3. Parameter 3: Sustainability: The sustainability assessment is aimed at eval- uating whether the proposed technological solution is viable in the long term. The questions under this parameter have been designed to guide the government officer in two main areas (i) Identifying whether the proposed technology will be able to sustain long-term goals rather than immediate objectives, (ii) Identifying whether the proposed technology has the capac- ity to be modified for increased dataflow and changing requirements with- out the need to change the technology all together, and (iii) The long term and sustained cost commitment for upkeep of the system.

For instance, under the DILRMP, states were given three technology options for preparing cadastral maps: pure ground method using Total Stations (TS) and Differential Global Positioning Systems (DGPS); hybrid methodology using aerial photography and ground truthing by TS and DGPS; and High-Resolution Satellite Imagery (HRSI) and ground-truthing by TS and DGPS. 52 As a result, only some states have geo-referenced maps. In a recent initiative, Unique Land Parcel Identification Numbers are being issued as a step towards linking land parcels to banks and civil courts and to prevent land fraud. However, this can only be done in states that have geo-referenced cadastral maps. In states where maps are not geo-referenced, the mapping process has to be redone for it to be included within the ULPIN, rendering previous efforts ineffective. Therefore, before selecting a technology, it is important to assess the sustainability of the solution over a longer time horizon.

4. Parameter 4: Shapeability: The shapeability assessment is aimed at eval- uating whether the proposed technological solution can be customised or modified as per local contexts. The question under this parameter has been designed to guide the government officer in three main areas: (i) Identify whether the proposed technological solution can be customised as per local requirements (ii) Identify the supporting infrastructure and capacity required for the customisation, and (iii) Identify the cost of cus- tomisation.

5. Parameter 5: Security: The security assessment is aimed at evaluating whether the proposed technological solution is viable in the long term. The question under this parameter has been designed to guide the government officer in three main areas: (i) Identify whether the proposed technological solution is compliant with data protection laws and rules, (ii) Identify the modifications required to meet the requirements of data protection laws and rules, and (iii) Identify the cost of such modifications and compliances.

6. Parameter 6: Synergy: The synergy assessment is aimed at evaluating whether the proposed technological solution can be supported by the ten- ement of the private sector and the local community. The question under this parameter has been designed to guide the government officer in two main areas: (i) Identify whether the proposed technological solution can be implemented using private sector engagement and expertise, and (ii) Iden- tify whether the proposed technological solution can be implemented or supported using local community engagement.

Table 4: Our novel Six-S checklist for evaluating technology-driven solutions in land administration

After the deployment of technology, it is important to undertake an impact assess- ment to examine whether or not the technology used leads to desirable outcomes identified in the Suitability Parameter assessment under the Six-S Framework. The impact assessment may be done by examining the desired objectives of the programme and examining whether these objectives have been achieved through the use of technology. This is essentially a programme audit, which must be done if sufficient time has elapsed from the introduction.

Conclusion

In modern times, the use of technology to improve land administration is inev- itable. Countries around the world have harnessed the potential of technology to make land administration more efficient and accessible to people. From the computerisation of land records and registration processes to online dispute resolution, and the use of blockchain in transactions, countries are employing innovative ways to provide better land-related services. In India also efforts are on to solve problems in this sector through the increased use of technology. However, the real impact of technology will be visible only if it has been selected taking into view the specific problem and its requisite solution. Factors affecting the success of a technology-driven solution include laws and procedures to support the new technology. We have identified some challenges in land administration and then have examined how technology is being used to meet these challenges.

While technology can ease process complexity and cost, we must adopt a sys- tematic approach to using technology in land administration in India. Further, given the regional and state variations of capacity and resources, it is important to recognise that success may vary from one state to another. We must caution against isomorphic mimicry in adopting technologies used in other countries. Further, given the increasing emphasis on the use of technology, it is important to examine whether our current strategy is translating into the tangible outcomes we desire on the ground. We conclude by stating that there is a need to constantly review the actual impact of a technology-driven solution in providing better land-related services to the people.

Justice for One and All: