Bangalore Encroached II

Some insider stories, some disturbing questions, and a few happy trends for public participation and accessible governance. Meet Mr. Digvijay Mote, a man interested in investigating the role of judges in judiciary - in the judgments being passed. He is of interest to us because, he has taken the issue of land grabbing in Bangalore as a test case to understand the influence of judges in judgments. In this pursuit, he has done some independent investigations on the issue. Meanwhile, KA Legislature itself has constituted a Joint Legislature Committee to investigate land grabbing in Bangalore Urban District, which is headed by MLA AT Ramaswamy. So the twain met - a curiously inspired and surprisingly well-informed private citizen met a refreshingly eager and approachable public servant. They met and discussed Bangalore's encroached land and get this, it’s on youtube!!* Some background on landgrabbing in Bangalore: Halfway through the investigation, the joint committee discovered that about 27,000 crore rupees worth of Govt., and Public lands have been grabbed. This estimate is based on the guidance value of the grabbed properties, not the true market value. True market value, the price you and I would pay, is a minimum 2 times the guidance value, according to AT Ramaswamy. In certain locations of the city, this true value exceeds even the two times the guidance value estimate. Now to some really really interesting things: One very prominent case of landgrabbing is what is known as the “Judicial Layout” – a layout for judges and court employees – a layout with an unapproved plan, built on unconverted agricultural land and riddled with other irregularities. An illegal layout for the judiciary, go figure! Both Mr. Mote and Mr. Ramaswamy agree on the details and extants of the grab in the Judicial layout. (Sort of verification of Mr. Ramaswamy’s work.) Where they differ is on the underlying dynamics of it. Mr. Ramaswamy’s line is that since KA does not have laws to curb landgrabbing, KA has become a safe haven for landgrabbers. For example, in KA, landgrabbing is not a punishable crime! As a result, there is an influx of money and grabbers from all around the country. Regarding, Judicial Layout in particular, he says, it is the housing committee that is directly responsible, and not the judges and officials. Though, Mr. Ramaswamy maintains that he is still investigating the matter. But Mr. Mote is mincing no words. He says, not only are the judges and court officials directly culpable for the violations, but landgrabbing in Bangalore would not have reached such levels, without the precedence set by this case. The judicial layout case, he contends, established a judicial precedence for cases of illegal conversions and unapproved layouts. Now that is a very fundamental observation and hints at a judge – business nexus. Judiciary got what it wanted from the business, and the business in return gets favours from the judges. judges-business bhai-bhai. Again, Mr. Mote’s interest according to him, is investigating the culpability of judges. So he goes on to make another devastating observation. He says, what the lawyers argue is all fine, but judgment itself is essentially a one man signature, that of the judge. The implied question here is - is their justice beyond law, arguments and procedures? Is the judge the all-powerful? Consider this, in some countries, a jury too is involved. Mr. Mote seems to be exploring the role of judges in much greater detail. For example, he questions why Justice Venkatachala, who has done some real good work, who was the head of lokayukta then, did not take up the case of judicial layout inspite of being informed of the irregularities. Insinuation being, is there a judge-judge nexus? judge-judge bhai-bhai. Given the cynical times we live in, I have to ask if Mr. Mote’s has an agenda. In keeping with his stated aim, Mr. Mote has a more generic website in which he explores the culpability of judges in several other cases. Some judges he lionizes others he disses. I am not knowledgeable enough to gauge the value of those writings, but as far as landgrabbing is considered I understand what he is talking about, it makes sense and it looked like even AT Ramaswamy agreed. But, irrespective of whether Mr. Mote has an agenda or not, given the seriousness of the mess that the Bangalore real estate is, I am happy for the questions he is asking. I am also more than happy that an actual head of a sarkari committee has been available enough to talk openly, in depth, and with interest and eagerness, and more importantly in public on the camera of a commoner. Mr. Mote is no media. At the time of this writing, inspite of being online for a long time, his youtube videos have single digit hits. What does AT Ramaswamy have in it? (There are some real cool moments,which betray the earnestness of these proceedings, when, as things heat up, ATR requests discussions off the camera more than once). I am really happy and feel informed by the level and depth these discussions. Mr. Mote, and Mr. AT Ramaswamy, thanks. Now here are some questions to consider: Does this take egovernance to the next level? Mr. Mote has held similar on camera discussions with the current lokayukta Justice Santosh Hegde too**. Can this lead to greater transparency and informed governance? Can we expect to see such open discussions on BMIC, SEZ, Chamalapura, Hebbal etc? ------------- *Mr. Mote meets AT Ramaswamy. Dec 21, 2006 Part1 Dec 21, 2006 Part2 Dec 21, 2006 Part3 Dec 26, 2006 Part1 Dec 26, 2006 Part2 **His Youtube Collection has other interesting videos about the encroachment issue. Joint Legislative Committee On Encroachments In Bangalore Urban District - Interim Report Part-II July 2007, from Mr. Mote's site.