1.3 Rationale of the N-LRSI

CHAPTER 2

METHODOLOGY AND PROCESS

The construction of the N-LRSI entailed both methodology- and process-related challenges. On the methodological front, the question that needed to be addressed in the first instance related to selection of appropriate parameters. The second issue was to ensure that the data sources used had the requisite credibility in measuring performance on these parameters. In test-checking data from Internet sources, a third methodological issue related to estimation of the universe and drawing of statistically representative samples. As regards the process, what appeared to be a reasonably straightforward set of steps in the beginning, in terms of how the samples would be test-checked or how the other information would be gathered, later presented many unforeseen hurdles. This necessitated changes in the steps of the process steps, and in some cases, even tweaking of the methodology. This chapter delineates the methodology and process adopted in constructing the Index.

2.1 Methodolog y for Constructing the N-LRSI

The N-LRSI has been constructed to award a maximum of 100 points to measure the performance of each State/ UT on the parameters being measured. The parameters, their assigned weights and the mode of securing information for evaluating performance, are presented in Table 2.1.

Assessing the Extent of Digitisation

I. Digitisation of the Textual Record: a) The total land area of the State/UT for which detailed land records ought to exist is assumed as the total area of the State/UT minus the area classified as forest land. The data has been obtained from the relevant State/UT websites and the KCs.

b) Out of the net area calculated in item a) above, the proportion of land area for which no record of rights (textual record) is said to exist, was calculated from the data obtained from the State/

UT websites/KCs; and deducted from the maximum of 15 points set aside for digitisation of land records.

c) The proportion of revenue villages for which the textual records are not digitised was calculated from the data on the DoLR website/State/

UT websites/KCs (taking the highest figure reported by all sources) and further deducted from the 15 points set aside for digitisation of land records.

d) Finally, the proportionate figure of villages failing the dipstick test check (of one random khasra number showing up in the village record) out of the total number of villages that were selected for the dipstick test check, was subtracted from the 15 points set aside for digitisation of land records.

e) For assessing the availability of legally useable copies of the textual record, the KC was the principal source of information. If the KC reported that for a State/UT, the record was available in a legally useable form, either free or by making a payment through an Internet-based gateway, then no deduction was made out of the 5 points allocated for this purpose. If copies of the record were available through a network of e-service centres, then 2.5 points were deducted. If the record was available only through a department office, then no points (zero) were awarded under this item. The N-LRSI has been constructed to award a maximum of 100 points to measure the performance of each State/ UT on the parameters being measured

Table 2.1: N-LRSI Parameters, Weights and Mode of Evaluation

(Maximum points =100)

Textual Record Spatial Record Registration Quality of Land Records 40202020

EVALUATION METHODPOINTSPARTICULARS

TEXTUAL RECORD a. Digitisation of Records of Rights (RoRs) b. Availability of legally useable copies of RoRs

SPATIAL RECORD a. Digitisation of Cadastral Maps (CMs) b. Availability of legally useable copies of CMs

REGISTRATION a. Public Entry of Data b. Availability of Circle Rates c. Mode of Payment of Stamp Duty / Registration Fee d. Digital Attestation of Document by Sub Registrar office (SRO) e. On-line Delivery of Registered Document

QUALITY OF LAND RECORDS f. Updating Ownership g. Extent of Joint Ownership h. Land Use i. Land Area j. Recording Encumbrances

15 5

Desk research KCs Test Checks

15 5

4

4 4 4 4

5 10 10 10 5

NOTE: KCs – Knowledge Correspondents (KCs were contacted under this exercise to obtain and advise on specific questions about the status and process of land records in the States/UTs; and they variously comprised senior officers, other retired and serving revenue officers and/or experts with knowledge of land matters in the relevant State / UT.)

SOURCE: N-LRSI 2019-20, NCAER II) Digitisation of the Spatial Record: The same methodology described above for the textual record has been adopted in the case of the spatial record.

III) Digitisation of Registration Process: The construction of the N-LRSI required measuring the computerisation of the registration process with respect to digital availability of the following five stages:

a) Facility for online entry of data with regard to the proposed registration:

If desk research showed or the KC reported the availability of a data entry portal for filing details of the proposed registration, then the State/UT was awarded the maximum of 4 points allocated for this purpose. If no such facility was available, no points were awarded to the State/UT.

b) On-line updated circle rates: The percentage of towns and villages in the

State/UT for which circle rates are not notified was calculated and deducted from the maximum of 4 points.

Thereafter, the proportionate failure rate in test checks was deducted.

c) Facility for on-line payment of stamp duty/registration fee/e-stamp: If desk research or information provided by the KCs showed that no online payment system or any other mechanism was available for online payment or the purchase of e-stamps and the traditional mechanism of stamp paper to be purchased from stamp vendors or the government treasury was in use, then no points were awarded under this head. If there was an e-stamp purchase mechanism, then 2 marks were awarded to the State/UT; whereas if there was an online system (for example, E-Gras) then the maximum of 4 points were awarded to the State/UT.

d) On-line verification of payment/ scrutiny of requisite details and completion of registration process with digital signature: If the facility existed and was compulsory for the

SRO, then the maximum of 4 points were awarded, subject to a deduction for the proportion of SROs in the

State/UT not covered by this facility. If the facility was optional, then only half the points were awarded, again subject to a deduction for the proportion of

SROs in the State/UT not covered by this facility. In case no such facility was available, then no (zero) points were awarded.

e) Immediate delivery of the digitally signed registered document: If the facility existed and was compulsory for the SRO, then the maximum of 4 points were awarded, subject to a deduction for the proportion of SROs in the State/UT not covered by this facility. If the facility is optional then only half the points were awarded, again subject to a deduction for the proportion of SROs in the State/UT not covered by this facility. In case no such facility was available, then no (zero) points were awarded.

B. Assessing the Quality of the Land Records In order to evaluate the second part of the N-LRSI, that is, the quality of the land records, the following five elements have been considered:

1. Updating ownership: The updating of ownership in the land records has been assessed on the basis of the information provided by KCs on the real-time linkage between the digitised textual records and the registration of transactions. Points have been awarded with respect to the