6.3 Land Use

Box A2.1: Sample Coverage under Extent of Digitisation of Land Records

STAGE I

Selection of Tehsils: Involves following steps

Step1: Identifying States/UTs with digitized land records- According to the DoLR website, out of 37 States/UTs, 31 States/UTs were found to have digitized Record of Rights (RORs), while 26 States/UTs have digitized Cadastral Maps (CMs). Therefore, in all samples were drawn for 31 States/UTs.

Step2: Identifying districts- In order to have universal representation in sample all districts either fully or partially digitized with respect to ROR/CMs were covered. A total of 634 districts have been covered from 31 sample States/UTs for the study.

Step3: Stratification of tehsils within districts- All tehsils either fully or partially digitized, were considered for sampling purpose. District-wise all tehsils were bifurcated into two stratums: 1) tehsils with digitized CMs (assuming here that these tehsils will also have digitized RORs but may or may not have linkages between them); and 2) tehsils with digitized RORs but not digitized CMs.

Step4: Selection of tehsils- Based on the proportion of total number of tehsils in each stratum (where relevant), five tehsils were selected from each district from both stratums together using Probability Proportional to Size (PPS) without replacement technique wherein the size indicator is ‘total number of villages per tehsil’ as available on the DoLR data base. The DoLR data shows that out of 6,329 tehsils in India (31 States/ UTs), 5,568 tehsils have digitized RORs and 3,542 tehsils have digitized CMs (either fully or in part) (Annexure Tables A2.1 and A2.2). The distribution of digitized tehsils across stratums shows 3,539 tehsils in Stratum 1 and 2,108 in Stratum 2. Of these, 2,859 tehsils (1741 tehsils in stratum 1 and 1118 tehsils in stratum 2) were selected in the Study sample (refer Annexure Table A2.3).

STAGE II

Selection of Revenue Villages

A maximum of 12 villages per sample tehsil were selected using circular systematic random sampling technique. For this purpose, only digitized villages as reported on the DoLR website were considered. In all, 60 revenue villages were selected from each district.

STAGE III

Selection of Khasra/Plot Numbers

The third stage involved random selection of one Khasra or plot from each sample village. The Khasra (Plot) number is the primary survey unit in the study through which the project team evaluated the extent of digitisation for the State/ UT. Overall, a maximum of 60 khasra/plot numbers were taken from each district.

(Refer Annexure Table A2.4 for sample details and Illustration A2.1 for procedure) Box A2.2: Sampling Framework for Digitisation of Registration Process

5 Stages- Registration Process

1

Data entry 2

Circle rates 3

Stamp Duty & Registration Fees 4

Verification of Payment & Digital Approval 5

Online delivery of registered documents

Stage 1 & 3

› Identified States/UTs with online registration portal facility available for these 2 components. › Each State/UT website was visited separately and the existence of such a portal was established. › Information also verified through the respective KCs.

Stage 4 & 5

› KC reported availability about usage of online portal for digital approval of registration process & delivery of registered documents. › Verification & scoring based on condition imposed by software w.r.t compulsory/ optional/ nonrequirement of online process. Stage 2 Circle Rates (online checks)

› Identifying States/UTs that make available circle rates online and extent to which made available.

› For these states/UTs, knowledge correspondent reported on the manner in which circle rates are made available (as a list of villages/ towns in each district/tehsil or a portal where property details are sought and circle rates generated. › In whatever manner circle rates available, same sample villages taken as in case of checking extent of digitisation of ROR & CM (Sampling

Strategy 1). › Verification for respective sample villages in a state were conducted to test if online circle rates are available or not. Difference between state claims and test check was computed for arriving at State/UT score.

Notes: In theory, the best way to assess this might have been to use a database of transactions which have been registered in a past period (say last two financial years) and drawing samples thence to check the extent to which the five steps were used on-line in these transactions. In practice however, the first limitation with this approach is being able to access the relevant data base, since this kind of information is not available in the public domain. Even if an appropriate sample could be drawn with the assistance of the KCs, the second limitation that arises is that test-checking for all the five stages would require access to a secure network that is only available to specified personnel working in the Registration Department of the respective State/UT. Considering these limitations, an alternative approach has been adopted to find out the extent to which the on-line system is available for prospective transactions and where relevant, devising the sampling strategy for the test-checks.