Behind the pen-down strike call in Punjab, the arrest of a patwari and kanungo in a 2018 case

The then patwari Balkar Singh had carried out the mutation of the land while then kanungo Darshan Singh had verified it. Patwaris and kanungos mainly maintain records regarding land ownership. Then tehsildaar Vipin Bhandari gave the final approval to the mutation and one third party person, Deepak Raj, also helped in the land mutation. The land was transferred in Deepak Raj’s name.

How did the incident come to light and what action was taken?

A complaint was filed and the inquiry started in early 2019. Ramvir, the then deputy commissioner of Sangrur, closed the inquiry at his end in 2021 and sent the details of the report to the Financial Commissioner Revenue (FCR) in Chandigarh. Sources said that the deputy commissioner had stated that if anyone had any objections related to the mutation of the land, an appeal could be filed before the sub-divisional magistrate (SDM) office.

Why was the case reopened after two years?

According to the records, the land in question belonged to Delhi-based Sudarshan Kumar and he had gifted it to his nephew Khanauri-based Deepak Raj.

“In the past two years, no blood relative came to file any appeal against the mutation of the land. However, recently, Sangrur-based property dealer Amrik Singh, who is a third party and is not related to the family at all, filed a complaint,” said Harvir Singh Dhindsa, president of the revenue patwar union. Based on the third party’s complaint, the Vigilance Bureau reopened the case and on August 23, Balkar Singh and Darshan Singh were arrested.

Vipin Bhandari has been named in the FIR lodged under charges of the Prevention of Corruption Act but is yet to be arrested.

What is the present status of all these employees?

Balkar Singh was still posted as patwari in Sangrur district while Darshan Singh was promoted as niab tehsildar and posted in Bareta town of Mansa district. Vipin Bhandari had become a PCS officer and was posted as SDM Patti in Tarn Taran district. However, in yet another transfer list in mid-August, Bhandari was transferred out but was yet to be given any posting. Before he could get any posting, this FIR was lodged on August 23.

What is the main concern of the unions?

Sukhwinder Singh Sukhi, general secretary of Revenue Kanungo Association Punjab said that while arresting these people, the vigilance bureau didn’t follow clause 17(A) of the Prevention of Corruption Act 1988, under which it is mandatory to seek permission from competent authority before arresting a patwari and kanungo.

Section 17-A of the Act statutorily prohibits the police from conducting enquiry/inquiry/investigation into any offence punishable under the Act arising from a “recommendation made” or “decision taken” by a public servant without previous approval of the competent authority.

The association members stated that in the case of Patwari and Kanungo, the immediate competent authority is the deputy commissioner of the district where the incident took place. For Bhandari, the competent authority is the financial commissioner revenue.

What did the unions do so far and what will be their next step?

Sukhi said that on August 28, they met Deputy Commissioner Sangrur Jitendra Jorwal. When asked, Jorwal said that they raised their concern over the 17(A) clause and it was forwarded to the FCR. “However, the inquiry in the present case was filed by the previous deputy commissioner,” he said.

Vijay Behal, general secretary, Punjab Revenue Officers Association (PROA), said that the CM spoke about their strike and the corruption case but he remained silent over our demands. Dhindsa said that after a meeting on Thursday afternoon, they have decided to go forward with the strike.