Land Policy and Administration in Karnataka

See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.
net/publication/317259250
Land Policy and Administration - Urban Property Ownership Records - The

Karnataka Experience
Book · January 2015
CITATIONS READS
0 5,673
5 authors, including:
S. Manasi Smitha Kanekanti Chandrashekar

Institute for Social and Economic Change 20 PUBLICATIONS 55 CITATIONS
85 PUBLICATIONS 210 CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE
SEE PROFILE
N. Sivanna P. G. Chengappa
KSRDPR University, Gadag, Karnataka University of Agricultural Sciences, Bangalore
24 PUBLICATIONS 33 CITATIONS 40 PUBLICATIONS 500 CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE
All content following this page was uploaded by S. Manasi on 31 May 2017.
The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC CHANGE
MONOGRAPH SERIES SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC
27. Public Expenditure and Strategies for Sustainable
Management of Enviroment and Forest Ecosystems
in Karnataka – Sunil Nautiyal, M S Umesh Babu and
CHANGE MONOGRAPHS
B P Nayak
28. Has Revival Package Improved Functioning of
Short-term Cooperative Credit Societies? - A Case
Study of Madhya Pradesh - Veerashekharappa,
Meenakshi Rajeev and Manojit Battacharjee
29. Politics of Exclusion: The Case of Panchayats in
South India - Anand Inbanathan and N Sivanna
30. Population Growth, Natural Resource Degradation
and Environmental Pollution in India -
43
SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC CHANGE MONOGRAPHS - 43

C M Lakshmana
31. Urban Governance and Organisational Restructuring:
The Case of Bruhat Bangalore Mahanagara Palike
(BBMP) - N Sivanna Land Policy and
32. Managing India’s Forests: Village Communities,
Panchayati Raj Institutions and the State - Administration in Karnataka
P J Dilip Kumar
33. Evaluation of Western Ghats Development Programmes Urban Property Ownership Records -
(WGDP) and Policy Recommendations: A Case Study
from Karnataka - Sunil Nautiyal, S Manasi and The Karnataka Experience
M S Umesh Babu
34. Government Subsidies in Karnataka - K Gayithri (Ed)
35. Green Business for Greening Karnataka: A Study of Coir
Industry - Krishna Raj
36. Conservation through Culture in Urban Ecosystems: A
Case Study from Bangalore, India - K V Raju, S Manasi, S Manasi
Sunil Nautiyal and K P Rashmi
37. Study on the Production and Profitability of Pulses and
K C Smitha
Beans in India - A Case Study of Karnataka -
Sunil Nautiyal, S Manasi, M S Umesh Babu and K S Rao N Sivanna
38. Financial Inclusion to Livelihood: Entangled to Gain -
Veerashekharappa and B P Vani
P G Chengappa
39. E-waste Management in Urban Cities: A Situation R G Nadadur
Analysis of Bangalore - S Manasi, N Latha and Bibhu Prasad
Nayak
40. Financial Inclusion through SHGs: Understanding
Quality and Sustainability of SHGs in Karnataka State -
Meenakshi Rajeev, B P Vani and Veerashekharappa
41. Ethnobotany and Medicinal Plants Conservation through
Scientific and Technological Interventions - A Case Study
from BRTTR, Karnataka - Sunil Nautiyal, N P Varsha,
Sravani Mannam and C Rajasekaran
42. Land Policy and Administration in Karnataka - Bhoomi-
KAVERI-Mojini Integration - S Manasi, B R Hemalatha, N
Sivanna, R G Nadadur and P G Chengappa
Published by: INSTITUTE FOR SOCIAL AND
The Registrar
Institute for Social and Economic Change ISBN 81-7791-142-2 ECONOMIC CHANGE
Dr VKRV Rao Road, Nagarabhavi P.O., Bangalore
Bangalore - 560 072 November 2015 2015
Phone: 23215468, 23215519, 23215592
E-mail: admn@isec.ac.in ` 110
Web: http://www.isec.ac.in www.isec.ac.in
MONOGRAPH SERIES
MONOGRAPH SERIES 1. Volume and Composition of Budgetary Subsidies in Karnataka –
M Govinda Rao (Ed)
2. Coarse Cereals in a Drought-Prone Region: A Study in Karnataka –
Number 43 November 2015 R S Deshpande and V M Rao
ISBN 81-7791-142-2 3. Prevalence of Iron Deficiency Anaemia and Malnutrition in India –
Dr M Ramakrishna Reddy
4. Micro-Finance, Poverty Alleviation and Empowerment of Women: A Study of
Series Editor: Anand Inbanathan Two NGOs from Andhra Pradesh and Karnataka – D Rajasekhar
5. Fertility Transition in Karnataka – T V Sekher and K N M Raju
© 2015, Copyright Reserved 6. Development Policies, Priorities and Sustainability Perspectives in
The Institute for Social and Economic Change India – Shashanka Bhide and Jeena T Srinivasan
Bangalore 7. Moon in the Mirror: Farmers and Minimum Support Prices in
Karnataka – R S Deshpande and T Raveendra Naik
8. Dimensions of Social Development: Status, Challenges and
Prospects – G K Karanth (Ed)
The Institute for Social and Economic Change (ISEC) is engaged in
9. At Loggerheads or Towards Sustainability? Changing Rural Livelihood Systems
interdisciplinary research in analytical and applied areas of social and Natural Resource Management – G K Karanth and V Ramaswamy
sciences, encompassing diverse aspects of change and development. 10. Role of NGOs in Promoting Non-Formal Environmental Education:
A Case Study – K Yeshodhara
ISEC works with central, state and local governments as well as 11. Public Health and Punchayati Raj Institutions in Karnataka –
international agencies by undertaking systematic studies of resource T V Sekher, Shashanka Bhide, MD Nazrul Islam and Monica Das Gupta
potential, identifying factors influencing growth and examining 12. Panchayats and Watershed Development: An Assessment of Institutional
Capacity – N Sivanna, M Gopinath Reddy, with the Assistance of M Srinivasa Reddy
measures for reducing poverty. The thrust areas of research include 13. Government Spending on Selected Public Health Services in India: Central,
State and the Local Governments – S Puttaswamaiah and Shashanka Bhide
state and local economic policies, issues relating to sociological and
14. Against Gravity?: RIDF and the Challenges to Balanced Development
demographic transition, environmental issues and fiscal, of Infrastructure – Meenakshi Rajeev
administrative and political decentralization and governance. It 15. Trends and Patterns of Migration: Interface with Education – A Case
of the North-Eastern Region – U A Shimray and M D Ushadevi
pursues fruitful contacts with other institutions and scholars devoted
16. Has the SHG-Bank Linkage Helped the Poor Gain Access to Capital?:
to social science research through collaborative research A Comparative Study between Karnataka and Gujarat – Veerashekharappa,
H S Shylendra and Samapti Guha
programmes, seminars, etc.
17. Vanishing Lakes: A Study of Bangalore City – P Thippaiah
18. Regulating Competition – S L Rao
The Social and Economic Change Monograph Series provides an
19. Decentralised Planning in Karnataka: Realities and Prospects –
opportunity for ISEC faculty, visting fellows and PhD scholars to M Devendra Babu
disseminate their ideas and research work. Monographs in the series 20. Reaching the Unreached (A Case Study of Dairy Farming among the
BCs in Karnataka) – Manohar S Yadav
present empirical analyses and generally deal with wider issues of
21. Dynamics of Population change in Karnataka: An Overview – C M Lakshmana
public policy at a sectoral, regional or national level. 22. Mirage of Social Mobility: The Case of Safai Karmacharis in
Karnataka – K G Gayathri Devi
23. Decentralised Governance and Service Delivery: Affordability of Drinking
Water Supply by Gram Panchayats in Karnataka – D Rajasekhar and R Manjula
Publication of this Monograph has been made possible through the 24. Incidence of Poverty among Social Groups in Rural India: Who are the Poorest
and Why? - R R Biradar
generous support of Sir Ratan Tata Deferred Endowment Fund.
25. History of Monetary Policy in India since Independence – Ashima Goyal
26. Inequality, Rents and the Long-run Transformation of India – Michael Walton
(Please see overleaf)
SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC
CHANGE MONOGRAPHS 43
Land Policy and Administration

in Karnataka
Urban Property Ownership Records -
The Karnataka Experience
S Manasi
K C Smitha
N Sivanna
P G Chengappa
R G Nadadur
Institute for Social and Economic Change

Bangalore
2015
Foreword
Increased urbanization process has led to complexities in land transactions
and regulations. The challenges posed by the recent global developments,
especially rapid urbanization, unregulated migration to urban centres, ineffective
land management practices, institutional fragmentation, decentralized reforms and
lacuna in the legal system to guarantee land titles, have increased the complications
in land administration. There are several problems associated with urban land
transactions caused due to high demand and soaring property values. Creation of
fake documents, falsified land documents are common occurrences causing unrest
and insecurity among the public.
Need for a well-defined land rights system has been the debated in several
forums and is widely acknowledged among researchers and policy makers because
the poor land management practices have ramifications in terms of conflicts, misuse
and inequitable distribution of resources. As a first step in the direction of urban
land reforms, the state of Karnataka has been implementing a smart initiative for
streamlining land administration through e-governance services in urban areas
called as Urban Property Ownership Records (UPOR). State-of- art technology
has been adapted on par with international standards, to work for building smart
cities. In addition, the UPOR is supportive in creating a data base with legal
guarantee of ownership title to urban property owners.
This monograph aims at documenting the processes and review the
stakeholder feedback of UPOR in the five pilot cities of Karnataka. The project
draws implications for better implementation of UPOR in other cities of Karnataka
as well as scale-up at the national level to address the issues of land administration
based on field insights as well as discussions held with regional level officials.
Policy interventions are recommended at the administrative, technical, legal, social,
financial and institutional levels. I hope this study will be useful for the Government
of Karnataka’s Survey Settlement and Land Records Department (SSLRD) in
particular and other state government departments in general. Further, the results
and recommendations of this study are of importance to researchers and students
pursuing the academic themes related to land governance and land resources
management.
I congratulate all the authors and research team members of this
monograph for their excellent work and contribution.
August 2015 M R Narayana

Bangalore Director in Charge, ISEC
CONTENTS
Abbreviations and Glossary v

List of Tables viii
List of Chart ix
List of Flow Charts ix
Acknowledgements x
CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION 1-31

1.0 Background 1
1.1 The Context 1
1.2 Recent Developments in Urban Centres 2
of Karnataka
1.3 Specific Objectives of the Study 7
1.4 Initiation of ‘Urban Property Ownership Record’ 8
(UPOR)
CHAPTER 2 REVIEW OF UPOR ACTIVITIES, CHALLENGES, 32-66

CONSTRAINTS AND TITLE ENQUIRY PROCESS
2.1 Creation of Property Records 32
2.2 Issues in the Creation of Property Records 37
2.3 Slums under UPOR project 41
2.4 Obstacles and Constraints in UPOR project 42
2.5 Title Enquiry Process (TEP) - An assessment 57
CHAPTER 3 COST ANALYSIS OF UPOR 67-75

3.1 Cost Analysis of UPOR Project in Five Pilot Cities 67
3.2 Cost Analysis of the Process in Mysore and Shimoga 68
3.3 Cost Analysis-Technical Service Provider (TSP) 69
3.4 Cost Sharing by Department (UPOR) 70
3.5 Improving Effectiveness and Reducing the overall 71
Cost of UPOR Implementation
3.6 Alternative Feasible Business Model: Implications 74
CHAPTER 4 SUGGESTIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 76-83

4.1 Need for Management and Operational Efficiency 76
4.2 Institutional and Structural Revision 77
4.3 To Promote Technical Competence 79
4.4 Social Aspects 81
4.5 Finance 83
NOTES 84-85
REFERENCES 86-87
ABBREVIATIONS
ADLR : Assistant Director of Land Records
BOOT : Build-Own-Operate-Transfer
CMC : City Municipal Corporation
CDP : City Development Plan
DDLR : Deputy Director of Land Records
DGPS : Digital Global Positioning System
DPC : Draft Property Card
EO : Enquiry Officer
ETS : Electronic Total Stations
GIS : Geographic Information System
GoI : Government of India
GoK : Government of Karnataka
GP : Gram Panchayat
GPS : Global positioning system, a US satellite positioning system
ICT : Information Computer Technology
IISc : Indian Institute of Sciences
IT : Information Technology
JDLR : Joint Director of Land Records
KIADB : Karnataka Industrial Area Development Board
KSSIDC : Karnataka State Small Industries Development
LAM : Local Area Map
MIS : Management Information System
MIT : Main Line Traverse
PKI : Public Key-Infrastructure
PMC : Project Monitoring Committee
PMU : Project Management Unit
PO : Project Officer
PRC : Property Registered Card
QC : Quality Control
RFP : Request for Proposal
SSLR : Survey Settlement and Land Records
SLA : Service Level Agreement
SLT : Secondary Line Traverse
STI : Survey Training Institute
SS : Survey Supervisor
SOI : Survey of India
TE : Title Enquiry
TEP : Title Enquiry Process
TOR : Terms of Reference
TPA : Town Planning Authority
UDD : Urban Development Department
v
ULBs : Urban Local Bodies
UTM : Universal Traverse Mercator
UPOR : Urban Property Ownership Record
GLOSSARY
Akarband – A register showing the area and rate of assessment of holdings
Alienated – Revenue land converted from Agricultural for non-agricultural
purposes (The voluntary and absolute transfer of title and
possession of real property from one person to another)
Benami – Fraudulent transactions
Chak – Single compact block produced in land consolidation
City – City includes any local area declared as a Municipal
Corporation, a City Municipality under any law for the time
being in force
DGPS – DGPS is a land-based technology that works to improve the
accuracy. Differential GPS, satellite positioning system based
on simultaneous satellite observations of a point of known
position and a point of unknown position
Grama – Village
Hissa – Subdivision of a survey number
Hobli /Hubli – Group or ‘circle’ of villages
Khata – It literally means an account; this Khata is an account of a
person who has property in the city
Mutation – Transfer of rights
Panchayat – Local self-government
Patta – Documentary evidence of rights in land issued by the
prescribed officer
PKI – A public-key infrastructure (PKI) is a set of hardware, software,
people, policies, and procedures needed to create, manage,
distribute, use, store, and revoke digital certificates
BHOOMI – Online Delivery and Management of Agricultural Properties
RTC – Record of Right, Tenancy and Crops- (also referred as
PAHANI in Kannada)
Survey – Survey includes all operations incidental to the determination,
measurement and record of a boundary or boundaries or any
part of a boundary and includes a re-survey
Village – Village means a local area which is recognised in the land
records as a village for purposes of revenue administration
and includes a town or city and all the land comprised within
the limits of a village, town or city
vi
Zilla – District
Gramanthara – Gramanthara properties are areas within village settlement
which got absprbed due to faster urbanization process.
vii
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1.1 : User Charges fixed for Various Property 13
Record-Related Services
Table 1.2 : Stakeholder Categories and a List of Minimum Documents 19
Collected for Mysore
Table 2.1 : Extent of Progress in Pilot Cities of UPOR, Karnataka 32
Table 2.2 : Properties Estimated and Documents received (prior to TEP) 35
for clearance from Local Bodies and Property Development
Agencies
Table 2.3 : Status in Collection of Documents 36
Table2.4 : Category of Properties and List of Documents Received 38
from Property Owners only for Ported Sectors-Mysore
and Shimoga
Table 2.5 : Gramathana Properties in Pilot Cities under UPOR 41
Table 2.6 : Details on Slums 42
Table 2.7 : Staff Details of the Service Provider 43
Table 2.8 : Constraints Encountered – Project Implementation 44
Table 2.9 : Time taken for UPOR project 46
Table 2.10 : Field Verification of Properties in Ported Sectors in Shimoga 48
Table 2.11 : Software Related Details in Pilot Cities under 49
UPOR, Karnataka
Table 2.12 : Notice Issued to Property Owners for Submission of 50
Documents
Table 2.13 : Financial Expenditure during UPOR Project Implementation 51
Table 2.14 : Progress in the Title Enquiry Process under UPOR 59
Table 2.15 : Property Documents Received from Owners for 61
Ported Sectors- in Mysore and Hubli-Dharwad
Table 2.16 : Department Staff Structure 62
Table 2.17 : Property details under TE process in Mysore and Shimoga 63
Table 2.18 : Constraints at Different Levels of UPOR Process 65
Table 3.1 : Proportion of Revenue Share for UPOR Project 68
Table 3.2 : Estimated Investment by TSP for providing IT Infrastructure 69
Table 3.3 : One-Time payment made to Service Providers of 70
UPOR pilot cities
viii
LIST OF CHART
Chart 1 : Functional Architecture of Integration Process of 25
Urban Property for Records Projects, Karnataka
LIST OF FLOW CHARTS

Flow Chart 1.1: UPOR Second Stage Implementation Process 17
in Mysore city
Flow Chart 1.2: Title Enquiry Process 23
Flow Chart 1.3: Stages of UPOR Implementation Process 26
Flow Chart 1.4: UPOR Implementation Process 27
Flow Chart 1.5: Classification of Stakeholders 29
Flow Chart 3.1: A Possible Option of TE Process 73
ix
Acknowledgements
This Monograph is the outcome of the research study carried out
at ISEC with a financial grant from the World Bank. We thank the World
Bank, Washington, DC, USA for giving us the opportunity to carry out the
study and, also the Government of Karnataka for supporting us in conducting
the study.
At the outset, we place on record our sincere thanks to Prof Klaus
Deininger, Lead Economist, Development Research Group, World Bank,
and Prof R S Deshpande, Former Director, ISEC, not only for initiating this
study but also for their continuous support and encouragement while carrying
out this study. We express our grateful thanks to our former In-charge
Director Prof M R Narayana, present Acting Director, ISEC, Prof K S
James for their support and encouragement. Our special thanks to Mr Rajeev
Chawla, then Special Secretary to Government, Revenue Department
(Bhoomi and Registration of Urban Properties), Mr Tushar Girinath, Principal
Secretary, Revenue Department, Ms Manjula, former Commissioner and
Dr V Ponnuraj, Commisioner, Survey, Settlement and Land Records
Department, Mr S M Bhavikatti, Deputy Inspector General, Department
of Registration and Stamps. We also received timely support from Mr
Rudresh, Deputy Director, City Survey, Mr K S Gurumurthy, Tahasildar,
Bhoomi Monitoring Cell, Mr Sridhar, Deputy Director, Project Monitoring
Unit and Mr Samarthram, Principal System Analyst, Bhoomi, NIC,
particularly for accessing the secondary data and related documents, which
came as handy for analyzing the macro level scenario of land administration
and we are highly obliged and thankful to them.
We are also grateful to the whole-hearted support and co-operation,
extended by the Deputy Commissioners of the Districts, Shri Betsurmath,
Commissioner, Mysore Urban Development Authority (MUDA), the project
officers and other staff of the five cities, in which we conducted our field
studies.
We would like express our sincere thanks to Shri. Prasad Kulkarni,
Shri Krishna Prasad, Shri Nisar Ahmed, Shri Narayan Swamy and Shri
Gadedavar, who were project officers of Mysore, Dharwad, Bellary and
Shimoga respectively. We would also like to thank Shri Rajkumar, Shri Sri
Hari, Shri Mahendra, Shri Srinivasrao and Shri Mathew, Technical Service
Provider/Service Provider of Bangalore, Mysore, Bellary and Shimoga
respectively, who helped us with the field work and, provided us with the
required data and information.
x
We thank Shri B C Byrappa, a retired officer of the Department of
Survey, Settlement and Land Records, our research staff, Dr M
Padmanabha, Ms S Senthalir, and Shri B K Annarao for their great
enthusiasm, it would have not been possible to complete the study, without
their support and co-operation.
We extend our sincere gratitude and appreciation to two anonymous
reviewers for their critical review and valuable inputs.
We are thankful to Dr Anand Inabanathan, the Editor, ISEC
Monograph Series for all his support during the publication of this monograph.
The financial support from ISEC-SRTT is duly acknowledged.
We thank ISEC’s administration, Prof Manohar Yadav, and
Accounts Officer Smt Sharada, Smt Jyothi, Ms Niveditha for their support.
S Manasi
K C Smitha
N Sivanna
P G Chengappa
R G Nadadur
xi
CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
1.0. Background
The smooth functioning of an economic system requires accurate
and efficient maintenance of the land record system, in order to carry out
any land-related transactions. Increased Rising urbanisation has led to
complexities in land transactions. The challenges posed by the recent global
developments, especially rapid urbanisation, unregulated migration to urban
centres, ineffective land management practices, institutional fragmentation,
decentralised reforms and lacuna in the legal system to guarantee land
titles, have increased the complications in land administration. Some of the
problems associated with urban land transactions like an unnatural increase
in the demand for urban property, creation of fake documents, ‘benami’
and fraudulent land transactions, coupled with insufficient checks/control
at various official levels for monitoring irregularities, has increased public
insecurity. A study conducted by Mckinsey1 in India showed that India
loses 1.3 per cent of its potential growth due to poorly maintained land
records. Much of the registration process in India does not result in valid
ownership titles. Hence, more than 70 per cent of legal disputes are land
based. Effective land governance has been a long-pending initiative that
needs to be addressed in India. In this backdrop, the initiative of ‘Urban
Property Ownership Records (UPOR)’ has been initiated in Karnataka
with a view to promote efficiency in service delivery and enabling citizen
interface with the digital management of land records throughout the state.
1.1. The Context
Like other states, Urbanisation in Karnataka has also increased
and it is estimated that 50% of Karnataka’s population will be living in
urban areas by 2025. The existing urban planning instruments are inadequate
to deal with the unorganised urban development leading to serious regional
imbalance. Historically, the first urban mapping or city survey in the country
was introduced during the year 1900-10 by Mr. Anderson. Such a
measurement was carried out in the Bombay Presidency and it later spread
to other major cities so that, by 1918, the system became a full-fledged one.
The Karnataka Survey Settlement and Land Records (KSSLR) Department
is one of the oldest survey departments established under the Bombay
Revenue Act and Karnataka Land Revenue Act (KLR Act, 1964). At
2 Land Policy and Administration in Karnataka
present, urban mapping exists in 48 urban centres of the State, even though
the records are not fully updated. Across 42 sectors of Belgaum, it has
been completed by continuing the system of Bombay Province. The city
survey concept was introduced in 6 more districts of Karnataka, between
1969 and 1975; the districts were Bellary, Gulbarga, KGF, Mysore, Bangalore
and Davangere. As many as 112 villages of Belgaum have been notified
for mapping and measurement. Similarly 137 sq. km of Bangalore core city
has been measured and mapped barring new extensions and fringe areas.
In Karnataka, survey was carried out during different periods (i) Original
Survey was carried out between 1863 and 1890. All the documents prepared
during the survey were in Modi, a Marathi language, (ii) Re-survey was
carried out between 1900 to1920, (iii) Hissa survey was carried out between
1926 and 1940 and (iv) Second Re-classification was carried out from
1955 to 1966.
It has been observed that, in the past few years, there has been a
manifold increase in property prices in urban India, while urban land
management practices have remained unplanned and unorganised. This
has been further accentuated by a rise in the population in the middle class,
large scale migration to cities of south Karnataka particularly to Bangalore,
and rise in income levels of educated and employed middle class in cities.
Hence, the need for a well maintained land record system for urban areas
cannot be over emphasised, particularly in the context of soaring land market
prices and a competitive urban economy that contributes a large share of
the gross domestic product (GDP).
In the light of a manifold increase in disposable incomes, the property
transactions also have increased substantially as seen by a spurt in the
number of property registrations especially in Bangalore in the recent years.
Moreover in the absence of authentic property documents, there is a
misconception among the urban citizens that the municipal ‘Khata’ is the
legal property document indicating the title status. This apart, most of them
do not register their property transactions with the authorities concerned
for many years unless it is a sale or partition of their properties. Most
people are not aware that both the sale deed and ‘Khata’ are not considered
legally valid and they do not guarantee title/ownership of a property. These
documents serve merely as proxies for absence of title. A Sub-Registrar
authenticates only transactions, not titles.
1.2. Recent Developments in Urban Centers of Karnataka
In recent years, though the State of Karnataka has experienced a
slower growth rate, the state’s GSDP (Gross State Domestic Product) is
Introduction 3
estimated to grow at 6.4 per cent (according to the Economic Survey of

Karnataka ) in the year 2011-12 and reach ` 2,97,964 crore as compared to
` 2,79,932 crore in 2010-11. This can be attributed to the growth in
manufacturing (4.1 per cent) and service sectors (10.6 in 2011-12)2. Manifold
increase in public sector investment followed by the private sector investment
as a result of liberalisation policies and urban sector reforms3 of the two
decades has affected the land rights of urban citizens. As a result of such
macro policies, there is a need for proper implementation of Karnataka’s
urban land legislation and regulations. Many recent developments such as
urban growth scenario, rapid urbanisation, privatisation, increase in demand
for land and decentralised reforms have increasingly complicated urban
land management practices. Further, outdated land titles have eroded the
authenticity of the existing legal titles. The following section will highlight
the issues and the context for initiating and implementation of UPOR project
in urban areas of Karnataka.
Rapid Urbanisation
The process of rapid urbanisation4 in Indian cities has shaped
economic growth and massive migration5 from rural areas to urban centres
between 1990s and 2000. Therefore, cities have become major centres of
industrial development and contributed to the boom in construction and
service sector industries. The expansion of these sectors has created
enormous job and investment opportunities but also an urban sprawl. By
2025, 50 per cent of Karnataka’s6 population (40 million) is expected to live
in urban areas. However, existing urban planning instruments are inadequate
to deal with unorganised development, leading to serious regional imbalances
and outdated implementation. Besides, the rate of urban poverty in the
state is more than rural poverty. The ratio of urban poverty constitutes 32.6
per cent in Karnataka which is high as compared to the other states. The
fundamental issue is to accelerate an orderly development of towns and
cities other than Bangalore, to accommodate waves of migration and
regulate the allocation and use of land, in a fair and impartial manner.
Private Investment and Demand for Urban Land
There has been an unnatural increase in demand for urban property
because of increasing demand for space and the subsequent increase in
property values. Demand for urban land is the result of certain factors,
namely, macro-level liberalisation policies promoting private investment in
the delivery of basic services, the development of services sector in the
form of establishing IT (Information Technology)/BT (Biotechnology)
industries, rural-urban divide resulting in mass exodus of migrants from

rural areas to cities in search of job opportunities and mining opportunities
(iron ore) in the Bellary region in Karnataka. As a result, great demand for
urban land is created by both informal communities and investors giving
rise to conversion of land from agricultural land to urban land. As this is
done without clear land titles, dubious land transactions and land litigations
have changed the concept of land use (Wadhwa 2002: 4703). This is further
compounded by the fact that existing land records are not updated and,
consequently time and cost overrun lead to problems in several development
projects (ibid: 4706). The state is unable to protect land rights of its citizens
which are threatened by large scale encroachments, court litigation and
land mafia. Therefore, there is a lacuna in existing legal framework
concerning ownership of land. Hence, the need for a system of state
guarantee of land title or property which can ensure and protect local land
rights is very important.
Decentralised Reforms
Decentralised reforms were ushered through 73 rd and 74 th
constitutional amendments. This has increased number of players in the
land sector with more opportunities to access to the services and has
necessitated a comprehensive land policy. Decentralised governance has
transferred authority to local governments to mobilise resources as well as
to manage land and deliver titles. Urban land constitutes a very important
asset to local government, generating significant financial resources through
land management and taxation (Burns 2007:81). Local land management
practices have assumed greater significance through development process
in terms of facilitating infrastructure, access to basic amenities and facilitating
sustainable natural resource management. At the same time, danger exists
in terms of local institutional overlapping, and conflicting agendas that
increase the cost and, thus, adversely affect the long-term development.
Emergence of decentralised local governance has facilitated greater
development in land administration.
Urban Land Management Practices
Effective urban land management is critical to the urban
development. The absence of well planned urban land management results
in spiraling land prices, speculation and inflation, and growth of informal
settlements that adversely impact social welfare and overall development.
Inadequate land management in urban areas also reflects violation of land
use regulations and encroachments (UDP 2009: 9; Dowall and Clark 1996:
Introduction 5
5). Typically, urban land regulations are influenced by zoning, regulated

densities, building by-laws, master plan and comprehensive city development
plans.
Violation of urban land use regulations is due to the lack of valid
cadastral, registration, and approved tenure records, resulting in haphazard
and unconstrained land use, seriously impacting on efficiency of the city.
Further, increase in the volume of urban land transactions due to rapid
industrialisation and changes in land use pattern due to urbanisation, have
further complicated the formal process of land registration. The situation is
accentuated by informal settlements such as slums7 and encroachments
occupying urban land without any formal security of land tenure causing
disjuncture between planning and urban development (Ramanathan 2009:
22). Under such circumstances, the city administration has less control
over land regulation, allocation and management.
Lacuna in Legal System to Guarantee Land Titles
Often, uncoordinated, disintegrated and outdated land-related
legislation leads to critical situations in many developing countries (Burns
2007: 20). Lack of effective implementation, and predominance of deeds8
system over title registration system, in the existing land system in India,
means that the title is not backed by the state guarantee (Wadhwa 2002:
4702). There are instances of land-related conflicts leading to court litigation
involving social cost and disruption of societal harmony Such as creation of
fake documents and fraudulent transactions where a single property is sold
to several persons, single property mortgaged to more than one person,
falsification of papers where transactions without the existence of properties
takes place and encroachments into public spaces leading to demolition of
illegal constructions. It is evident from all this that there are insufficient
checks/controls at various official levels for monitoring irregularities which
have all led to public insecurity and mistrust. Sub registrar remains only a
signing authority and authenticates the document during a transaction but
has no information about the existence of the property or if the seller is the
actual owner at all, thus leading to the piling up of land-based legal disputes.
In the context of environment, misuse of land has led to encroachment of
lakes where buildings are constructed violating the law by both the
government and the private parties. All this has implications on ground
water level, water quality and urban flooding. Due to illegal encroachment
of public land by slums, they lack access to basic amenities like water and
sanitation. Disposal of garbage in open lands is a matter of concern and
have led to peri-urban conflicts with refusal from villages to accommodate

waste from cities, thus putting pressure on land use management.
Though the constitution of India guarantees right to property as a
fundamental right, later with 44th constitutional amendment in 1978, the
right to property was reduced to the status of legal right and is no longer a
fundamental right with constitutional remedies. In Karnataka, land use is
regulated by Karnataka Land Reforms Act of 1964 and Indian Registration
Act of 1908. While these acts envisage the compulsory registration of sale
of land, they do not provide for registration of title, but only result in a deed
of transaction. Registration process merely acts as a fiscal instrument of
the state to collect a ‘fee’, but does not provide statutory guarantee9 to the
land title. Further, Section 18 of the Registration Act does not require
compulsory registration of all land-related transactions10 (Wadhwa 1989:
2324; Ramanathan 2009: 21). As a result, existing legal titles do not reflect
any changes resulting in succession or transfer or more broadly the
customary rights recognised in the community (like slums/informal
settlements) and these differences add to the already complex urban land
dynamics.
In this context, the objective was to arrive at a sustainable path for
land administration in India. The Government of Karnataka under the
Department of Survey, Settlement and Land Records with the assistance
of the World Bank, took up the initiative of UPOR on 2nd December 2009.
UPOR was initiated in 5 cities of Mysore, Hubli, Dharwad, Shimoga, Bellary
and Mangalore with public-private partnership mode, with a Build-Operate-
Own-Transfer model. This was to ensure that the use of modern and latest
technology was adopted and was at par with international standards.
Besides, it would aid in creating a onetime data base with assurance of
ownership title to urban property owners with measurement and mapping
of all urban properties.
The benefits to be had were visualised protection from unauthorised
encroachments henceforth and accuracy in ownership data resulting in
security of properties. Process of continuous updating is built into the system,
thus ensuring that property records would remain current and accurate.
There would be easy access to information on transfer/mutation of
properties. It would further facilitate seeking of legal assistance from courts
in case of disputes besides availing bank loans easier. Other benefits would
be the integration of services like water, electricity etc.
For better implementation, feedback from stakeholders was
considered important and ISEC (Institute for Social and Economic Change)
was involved in the documentation of process and workflow so that it would
Introduction 7
stand as a reference document for other states and policy makers working
in this arena. Stakeholder analysis and review of activities and problems
would provide feedback to the Department officials to improve and
understand the field-level problems and enable them to monitor progress
and detect problems immediately. The study also aimed to be critical to
help improve performance, provide the pre-condition for scaling up of efforts
in other cities of Karnataka and disseminate the approach at a national
level to address issues of land use administration.
Keeping in view the above context, the present monograph provides
a detailed documentation and mapping of the UPOR processes. The
monograph is presented in four sections. Chapter 1 presents a detailed
documentation of the process of UPOR implementation. Chapter 2 explores
typology of legal situations based on Title Enquiry Process (TEP) database
from the field and adequacy of existing arrangements to promote awareness
among the citizens. Chapter 3 captures cost components involved in the
UPOR implementation. The study analyses cost sharing among the vendors
and present actionable suggestions for operational effectiveness. Finally,
Chapter 4 provides policy suggestions and discusses interventions required
at various stages of the UPOR implementation and recommend appropriate
methods for constituting monitoring system to achieve the set targets.
1.3. Specific Objectives of the Study
The study was taken up with an aim to set up a framework for a
sustainable expansion of UPOR to monitor the progress and detect problems
for undertaking corrective action with the following objectives in view (i)
To document the economic and social viability, outreach and desirability of
the project (ii) To make suggestions for improvement and modification where
necessary (iii) To recommend steps to be taken to establish a framework
for monitoring progress at different levels (iv) To advice on how to deal
with demands for expansion without running the risk of undermining
sustainability or risking non completion of the project in the areas where
activities have already started.
Methodology
For systematic evaluation of the on going process of UPOR project
implementation and performance in five cities of Karnataka, following
methodology was followed:
 Review of literature on land survey in India and Karnataka.
 Collection of secondary data like concept notes, status reports,
formats for performance, documents, MoUs etc from the Survey,
Settlement and Land Records Department, the Government of

Karnataka.
 Reports, documents and raw data on status and performance were
collected from the respective pilot cities of Shimoga, Mysore, Hubli-
Dharward, Bellary and Mangalore.
 Relevant data were collected from urban local bodies of the pilot
cities in Karnataka.
 Initial meetings were held with officials and staff of UPOR at
Survey, Settlement and Land Records Department, the Government
of Karnataka. Similar meetings were conducted with Service
Providers11 and Technical Service Providers at respective pilot cities
of Karnataka.
 Additional data and information were collected from the relevant
officials in pilot cities and UPOR website.
Field Survey
Several visits were conducted to the UPOR pilot cities to evaluate
the progress and status of the implementation. Reports on status and data
were collected from all the five pilot cities to assess the current performance
and constraints faced during the implementation of the project. In addition,
focus group discussions and personal interviews using checklists were held
with different stakeholders of UPOR like urban local bodies, banks, local
people (property holders), local community leaders and slums to gather
their perceptions on the property cards and subsequently assess the demand
side requirements to further enhance the implementation process.
1.4. Initiation of ‘Urban Property Ownership Record’ (UPOR)
Urban Local Bodies (ULBs) in Karnataka have been maintaining
property tax details through a property tax record called “Khata12” document,
presumed as a property ownership record. Moreover, as ULBs are not
authorised to create and maintain property ownership records, they maintain
only Khatas for the purpose of tax collection from urban citizens and it is
not a Record of Rights (RoR) issued in respect of revenue or agricultural
land. Therefore, Khata per se does not enjoy a legal status. The existing
city survey system is now being extended to all the major cities of the state
as part of the Urban Property Ownership Rights (UPOR) initiative. Initially,
pilot projects are being carried out in the cities of Mysore, Hubli-Dharwad,
Shimoga, Mangalore and Bellary on a trial basis in order to cover all the
Municipal and urban properties in accordance with the provisions of KLR
Introduction 9
Act 1964. The Act requires the creation of property ownership cards for
areas with more than 5000 population.
1.4.1. Mandates of Survey Settlement and Land Records (SSLR)13
The Department of Survey Settlement and Land Records,
Government of Karnataka (GoK), as per the Karnataka Land Revenue
Act of 1964, and 1966, (KLR Rules) has been mandated to prepare, maintain
and preserve spatial and non-spatial data relating to ownership of land for
urban properties in urban areas of Karnataka. The specific sections of the
KLR Act 1964 governing the implementation of UPOR in Karnataka include
(a) Chapter 1 – Section 1(2) and Section 2(2, 6, 38), and (b) Chapter XIII
– All Sections (148 to 156) popularly known as “City Survey”.
The main objective of city survey is to initiate the process of an
accurate survey of private and government properties (like buildings, houses,
roads, playgrounds, parks etc), generate a survey sketch including other
property-related documents in cities and towns and accord a specific and
permanent identification number to each property. This process is mainly
related to administrative, legal and economic aspects of land-based
transactions. City survey maps are the main source of information for city
planning like roads, road numbers, railway lines, parks, playgrounds, individual
and government properties, and institutional properties with specific numbers
and sketch details.
This information in turn is used by other departments like electricity
companies, water supply department, municipal corporations and ULBs
for tax assessment purposes. The police department, urban land development
bodies and census department use this information for their developmental
planning and projects. Thus, the survey department renders services like
survey maps and sketches and issues certified copies of property details
like buildings, lands and property register cards. Property cards, which were
proposed to be issued to all land-owners, will be legal ownership records as
per section 133 of Karnataka Land Revenue Act 1964, replacing the existing
records of presumptive ownership. The records will be maintained in the
form of maps and sketches depicting boundaries and the extent of individual
properties and text relating to ownership, land use and other land-related
particulars.
In order to make the process citizen-friendly, as per the Karnataka
Land Revenue (KLR) Act 1964, the Survey, Settlement and Land Records
Department (SSLR) introduced Urban Property Ownership Records
(UPOR), a comprehensive framework for the creation and management
of urban property records in December 2009. The Work Order was issued
on 2nd December 2009, while Master Services Agreement was signed on
11th January 2010.
Although SSLR maintains urban property records in Bangalore,
Mysore and 41 other towns of Karnataka, due to insufficient manpower
and financial crunch, the records were not updated on a regular basis.
Arising out of the successful implementation of Bhoomi in rural Karnataka,
the need for a similar property records system was felt for urban centres
also (Mukerji 2011). Form 13 Property Card (PC) comes under the statutory
provision and is mandatory for transactions like bank loans or selling property.
UPOR is being implemented in five cities (Mysore, Mangalore,
Bellary, Hubli-Dharwad and Shimoga) of Karnataka since December 2009.
It is a process of confirming the presumptive property title and providing a
conclusive property title of all urban properties” as mandated under the
Land Revenue Act, of 1964 and KLR Rules 1966. The project aims to
create a comprehensive database, both spatial and non-spatial, of all
properties of urban centres in Karnataka. Once the results of these pilot
projects are known and studied, a further decision will be taken, by
government, about extending UPOR to other cities and towns.
1.4.2. Objectives of UPOR
The main objective of UPOR is in providing assurance of ownership
title to urban households and in creating a fresh data base for urban mapping;
it is important to note here that generation of revenue is not the sole purpose
of urban mapping under UPOR. The important sub-objectives of UPOR
are (UPOR webpage) 14 - (i) Measurement and mapping of all non
agricultural lands and urban properties (ii) Creating and maintaining Record
of Rights (RR) for all non agricultural lands and (iii) Preservation of existing
land records by the revenue department.
Outline and Scope of UPOR15
The Government of Karnataka has initiated a land record project
for urban centres named ‘Urban Property Ownership Records (UPOR).
Under UPOR, property records will be recreated for urban areas under
the provisions of Karnataka Land Revenue Act 1964, very similar to the
process of property records created in rural areas through Bhoomi project.
UPOR project was initiated to create and maintain property ownership
records in five urban bodies within a framework of managing land records
in urban centres.
Introduction 11
The task of creating and maintaining the property records for urban
areas involves 4 distinct steps.
1. Creation of Property records which includes (i) survey and mapping of
all properties in the cities, and (ii) verification of ownership claims.
2. Continuous management and maintenance of property records includes
(a) Creation of property records for new extensions of cities (b)
Documenting changes in property records in the context of new
constructions, and (c) Updating changes in land use and mutation of
property records in case of sale/partition
3. Operation and Maintenance of service delivery channels to Bangalore
One centres to deliver various property record-related services to
citizens. These service centres are established by the Survey
Department. The above three tasks are performed by service provider
and finally
4. Creation of IT infrastructure that will enable the storage of property
records and delivery of various property record-related services like (i)
Title Enquiry; (ii) Certifying Transactions and (iii) Changes in property
records. The IT infrastructure comprises (a) Software application; (b)
Various COTS software products; (c) Servers, Storage and other IT
hardware. These activities are carried out by technical service providers.
The first three tasks are performed by service providers (SPs),
and while the fourth one by Technical Service Providers (TSPs).
1.4.3. Implementation of UPOR: Public-Private Partnership Model
(PPP)
The public-private-partnership (PPP) model has been followed for
city survey, where in private agencies are selected through bidding, and
they will implement the UPOR activities in a phased manner across five
pilot cities. At present, the PPP (Public-Private Partnership) BOOT (Built-
Own-Operate and Transfer) model for urban mapping is being implemented
in five cities, namely, Mysore, Hubli-Dharwad, Bellary, Shimoga and
Mangalore.
Subcontracting through PPP model16
The implementation work has been sub-contracted to two categories
of vendors namely Service Provider (SP) and Technical Service Provider
(TSP). While SP is in charge of the creation of both spatial and non-spatial
database under the supervision of the department staff, the TSP is in charge
of the creation of software, not only for pilot cities but also for the entire
state.
The respective Deputy Directors of Land Records (DDLRs)17 have

been appointed as Project Officers (POs) who would be in charge of the
projects at the local level. Apart from the DDLRs, 30 surveyors have been
identified for each location. The surveyors are required to accompany the
vendors and monitor and guide them at all stages, considering that the ongoing
initiative is quite unique in a way and first of its kind. In all, 150 surveyors
and five DDLRs have been imparted training at the Survey Training Institute
(STI) in Mysore for a month. Citizen Service centres have also been
constituted in all the cities where the project is being implemented for the
collection of documents from property owners where the project is being
implemented.
Commercial Model of Service Delivery18
Both the Service Provider (SP) and Technical Service Provider
(TSP) will earn their income/revenue from the following sources:
• Initial one time support from the Survey Settlement and Land
Records
• From the first year onwards, the mandatory purchase of property
records by the citizens of urban centres
• Payment towards various types of property record-related services
to the citizens and government departments
Pricing of various services of the department and the rate of property
records were determined through commercial biding submitted by the
prospective service providers. The department of SSLR fixed the rates for
various property-related services. The SP and TSP would be paid on the
basis of commercial bids submitted to the department. The remaining share
would accrue to the department to be used for the management and
improvement of the project. Table 1.1 provides a glimpse of user charges
fixed for various property record-related services offered under the UPOR
project.
Introduction 13
Table 1.1: User Charges Fixed for Property Record-Related

Services
Transaction User Charges Minimum Maximum To be paid by
Facility for viewing 25 per cent of Not Not Owners
Property Record only the first time Applicable Applicable
for those owners/ user charge for
interested holders property record
who have PKI facility
Re- issue of Property 25% of the first Not Not Owners
Record (second time time user charge Applicable Applicable
or subsequent issue for property
to citizen) record
Transaction History 25% of the first Not Not Owners
of a property. Will be time user charge Applicable Applicable
available only after for property
the establishment of record.
UPOR system.
Various entities who 25% of the first Not Not By any entity
have a financial stake time user charge Applicable Applicable that has an
in the property for the property interest in
(owner, lease, record to be paid the property
mortgage holder) may annually by every and wants to
register themselves for interest holder register for
receiving information the service
through email, SMS
alerts, in case any
transaction is initiated
Request for Hudbust. @ Rate of 25% of Not Not Owners
the first time user Applicable Applicable
charge for the
property record.
In addition, the
Citizen will make
a payment towards
Hudbust charges
to the Department
Sub Division of a @ Rate of 25% of Not Not Owners
Property (preparation the first time user Applicable Applicable
of 11E pre mutation charge for the
sketch property record
In addition the
Citizen will make
a payment for
Pre-Mutation charges
to the Department.
contd...
Any property @ 1% of the Twice the Not To be collected

transaction requiring registration fees first time Applicable by Registration
registration paid User Charge Department
for Property and remitted
Record to the City
Survey
Department
Any property @ Rate of 50% ` 300 Not Owner or
transaction not of the cost of Applicable Successor
requiring registration preparation of the
like succession in the original property
event of will record. See Note
Incorporating User charge fixed Price of Twice the Bank
details of a equitable at @ 0.1% of the User Charge first time
mortgage issued Value of the for the first User Charge
by a Bank on the Bank loan time issue for Property
Property Document of original Record
property
record
Any other change in @ 25% of the ` 300 Not By the entity
the property record User Charge for Applicable making the
first time issue as per request
of the property calculation
record
Source: UPOR webpage www.upor.karnataka.gov.in
Note: It has been clarified that after the mutation, if a new owner emerges on account
of sale, he shall have to pay the full cost for the first time to procure the record.
However, in case of succession or partition, a copy will be provided at 25% of
the cost if the original owner has taken a copy earlier. This will apply even if
property is divided by way of succession or inheritance. Hudbust is a sketch
issued by the Survey Department clearly showing the boundaries fixed on the
land marked by boundary stones.
Operational Features of UPOR19

Some of the components of the UPOR project are intended to
capture the complete details of both spatial and non-spatial properties. Spatial
data covers both the building and land on which the building stands. Particular
details of spatial data include (i) fixing coordinates of the boundary points
of a certain land plot (ii) area of the land and (iii) building details like the
actual built area, the number of floors and the rights on the property in
relation to ownership, mortgage, lease, easement, and the property history
of transactions. The time frame fixed for the project was six years for both
SP and TSP starting 270 days from the issue of order to the service provider.
Introduction 15
Governance Structure: Project Monitoring - The progress of each city

under the UPOR project was to be monitored by the different committees
constituted for the purpose. The present level of monitoring is as given
below:
The monitoring activity comprises of four prime execution stages
of UPOR project:
1. Constituting Project Monitoring Committee (PMC)
2. Constituting Project Management Unit (PMU)
3. Inter-departmental Coordination and
4. Coordination between Vendors
1.4.4. Advantages expected from UPOR project implementation20
Some of the advantages of the UPOR system to the citizens/
organisations/agencies are as follows:
• A robust system of Urban Property Ownership Records with a
fair degree of accuracy both on the map and in ownership details
(both spatial and non-spatial), and cost effective.
• Property record is a trusted record of all land-related transactions
for regulatory and legal purposes.
• A process of continuous updation is built into the system.
• Both the map and ownership data are highly accurate with available
coordinates.
• Information on every property created is available for one and all.
• The cost of getting one time UPOR records is much lesser as
compared to 2 per cent stamp duty paid during the registration of
property under the Registration Act and
• Since a process of continuous updation is built into the system, the
property record over the years will continue to remain current and
accurate i.e. will not become obsolete or inaccurate.
1.4.5. The City Survey Stage
1.4.5.1. Spatial Survey
The city survey work under UPOR relates to both spatial and non-
spatial data. The spatial data involves the establishment of control networks
via primary, secondary and tertiary control points, and maps, while non-
spatial data includes: (i) collection of data and verification of documents;
(ii) measurement of properties; (iii) preparation of index mapping; (iv)
creation of a master database (data entry); (v) collection of original
documents; (vi) scanning of the documents and (vii) preparation of draft
property cards.
There are four stages of city survey:

1. Establishing control networks.
2. Conducting a detailed survey of each property.
3. Title Enquiry Process and preparation of Property Cards and
4. Citizen Service Delivery
Establishment of Control Networks21
One of the major tasks of the project is to establish control networks
which include (i) Primary control point (PCP); (ii) Secondary control point
(SCP); and (iii) Tertiary control point (TCP). These control points are
established for fixing coordinates, linked to each other for accuracy.
The Town Planning Authority (TPA) of respective cities has already
established PCPs and SCPs. But the area of interest in UPOR was to
establish a robust control point network, covering 100 per cent of developed
area as well as 50 per cent of buffer area considering future development
of additional PCPs (one for every 4 km) and SCPs (for every 1 sq km).
The coordinates for these points are satellite based which are obtained
using DGPS and observation is carried out as per the accuracy points. The
obtained coordinates are processed in house. Based on the instruments of
Town Planning of Mysore, the department of Survey of India and Town
Planning Authority has established 67 PCPs, 160 SCPs and 8,340 TCPs in
Mysore city.
Use of Electronic Total Stations (ETS) instrument
A Base Map on a scale 1:20,000 was compiled for Mysore City,
using Survey of India (SOI) Maps and updated Satellite Image. The Base
Map is on WGS 84 Datum and Universal Traverse Mercator (UTM)
Projection. Survey of India (SOI) has already established Primary Control
Points (PCP) as well as additional PCPs and subsequently base map has
been plotted. The established PCP and SCP points have been further
extended to Main Line Traverse (MLT) and Secondary Line Traverse (SLT)
by providing Tertiary Control Points (TCPs). Main Line Traverses start
from PCP and SCP and converge on closed in PCP & SCP using ETS
(Electronic Total Station: Cadastral maps are generated using ETS
instrument) for achieving high degree of accuracy. TCPs with 03 cm
positional accuracy have been established on permanent structures.
Introduction 17
Flow Chart 1.1: UPOR Second Stage Implementation Process in

Mysore City
Generation of Preliminary index map
Data Entry of all Secondary source data
Serving Notice
Demarcation of Collection of
Property corners Documents from
by the Department Citizens
Data Entry of
Survey with ETS
Collected
and Generation
Documents
of Map
Validation of Survey by Validation of

the Department Spatial and Non
Spatial data by SP
Validation of Data
by the Department
Submission of Spatial and

Non-Spatial records to
the Department for Title
Enquiry Process
Source: UPOR Office, Mysore

All the TCPs have been established in such a way that there is at
least one TCP within the range of 100 metres from the other one, with a
fair inter-visibility; using TCP Points. The total station readings are taken
as per the requirements.
Index Mapping: UPOR
After establishing control networks, next stage is index mapping.
There are three steps involved in index mapping. They are, (i) dividing the
entire city area into sectors and zones; (ii) giving numbers to all the properties
and (iii) geo-referencing of village maps.
1.4.5.2. Survey: Non-Spatial Survey
The second and third stages of UPOR implementation relate to non-
spatial survey. There are seven steps involved in a non-spatial survey. They
are, (i) collection of data and verification of documents; (ii) measurement
of properties; (iii) preparation of index mapping; (iv) creation of a master
data base; (v) collection of original documents; (vi) scanning of the
documents and (vii) preparation of draft property cards.
UPOR Implementation: Activities Involved in Second Stage
During the second stage of UPOR implementation, as the first
step, different sets of stakeholders are informed of the survey through a
notice from the department of city survey. Stakeholders are requested to22
produce relevant ownership documents for scanning and verification. The
list of documents depends on property type and category of stakeholders.
Table 1.2 presents details of stakeholder’s categories and list of documents
collected by the SSLR in Mysore city. The UPOR office in Mysore city
has received about 90,000 documents (files)23. The second step is for detailed
spatial planning to be carried out for demarcating and categorising the
properties in the city.
Introduction 19
Table 1.2: Stakeholder Categories and a List of Minimum

Documents Collected for Mysore
Sl. Category Type List of Minimum Documents
No.
1. Mysore Urban Development a) Sale deed from MUDA to allottee
Authority (MUDA) b) In case the present owner is not an
allottee, the sale deed* from original
owner
c) In case some of the sale deeds are missing,
then EC to cover the period of missing
deeds
d) Possession certificate issued by MUDA
e) Approved layout plan
f) Khata certificate
g) Latest tax paid receipt
2. Gramathana Ashraya a) First sale deed after the conversion of land
layouts, Janatha Colony b) Second sale deed from private person/
properties agencies to the site allottee, EC
c) Present owners sale deed*
d) Possession certificate (Hakku patra)
e) Tax paid receipt
f) Khata certificate
3. Layouts developed by a) First sale deed after the conversion of land
private persons /Agencies b) Second sale deed from private person./
agencies to the site allotee
c) Present owner sale deed*, EC
d) Conversion order (if conversion order for
the layout already exists then this
document is not required)
e) Approved layout plan (if a layout plan
for the layout already exists, then this
document is not required)
f) Municipality Khata
g) Tax paid receipt
4. Housing Board Layouts a) Allotment letter
(KHB) b) Sale deed from KHB to allottee
c) In case the present owner is not allottee,
the sale deed* from the original owner to
the present owner
d) In case some of the sale deeds* are
missing, then EC to cover the period of
missing deeds
contd...
e) Possession certificate issued by KHB

f) Khata and tax paid receipt
5 Properties in Alienated a) RTC in the name of the owner
lands but layout plan b) Mutation and present RTC, EC
not approved c) Conversion order
d) Conversion Sketch
e) Sale deed from land owner to the first
buyer site
f) Latest sale deed if the present owner is
not the first buyer
g) Khata and tax paid receipt
6. Properties in agriculture a) RTC in the name of the owner
survey numbers-revenue b) Mutation and present RTC
sites c) Sale deed*from the owner as per RTC to
the present owner of the site
7. Properties in government a) Grant order in the name of original
land with survey numbers grantee
b) Saguvali chit in the name of the original
grantee
c) Conversion order
d) Conversion Sketch
e) Sale deed* from grantee to first buyer after
conversion
f) Latest sale deed* in case multiple
transactions have taken place and EC
8. Agriculture lands a) Latest RTC in the name of the owner
b) Mutation
Source: UPOR office, Mysore
• OR All other supporting documents showing property ownership.
As each individual property is unique, in terms of coordinate24

measurements, the entire city is divided into zones, sectors and village
properties. The city of Mysore is divided into 11 zones, 50 sectors, and 42
villages. As the survey knowledge of service providers is inadequate, 32
surveyors have been appointed by the department for the measurement of
individual properties in the city.
In the third step, government surveyors identify property corners which
are critical to determining the boundaries of properties. The discretion of
private agency is not considered for this critical activity. Here, all the three
control points network (PCPs, SCPs and TCPs) and fix a value for each
property. Values are fixed for all the properties including roads, lakes and
Introduction 21
public establishments in the city for measuring individual plots/sites and

households. Finally, in the fourth step, boundaries are fixed using Electronic
Total Stations (ETS) to arrive at coordinates.
As the work proceeds, in the fifth step, using UPOR vectorisation
software, property maps are prepared, which is also referred to as ‘Index
Mapping’. Maps are generated for the entire city survey jurisdiction. A
Detailed survey map is generated depicting roads, public establishments
and households. Complete details are collected by block, compound and
plinth area. A relevant notice is issued regarding the date of survey to the
concerned individual property owners in the city. However, it is not final,
because the survey has to be validated by the SSLR department.
Department Validation of Survey
The department selects 5,000 properties randomly (20 per cent of
the work) from each sector and check for validation. Going by the
coordinates drawn using ETS, variation between 1 per cent minimum and 2
per cent maximum is ignored. However, if the difference is 10 per cent for
each sector, then the entire sector is resurveyed.
After mapping of the city properties, in the sixth step, a master
database is generated by collecting documents from urban authorities,
municipalities and individual property owners. In addition, municipal data,
alienation data, government land data and city survey details are stored in
master database (for Mysore, Bellary and Hubli-Dharwad). Vendors (SP)
collect relevant documents from property owners (citizens) in the city. These
documents are scanned using UPOR software before porting it. Households
without documents are left out. Finally, exception reports are prepared.
Entry in Master Database Using UPOR Software
After submission of the data and the subsequent porting of the
same using the UPOR, software details are entered in to the Master
Database that includes the following:
• Basic data entry: (i) Municipal Data; (ii) Alienation Data25; (iii)
City Survey Data; (iv) Government Land Data; and (v) Land
Acquisition Data.
• Culled out Information : (i) Chalta Number26, (ii) Holder/GPA
Details, (iii) Lease Details, (iv) Issues and Rights, (v) Property
Category and (vi) Shared Property.
• Quality Control Data: (i) Municipal Data, (ii) Alienation Data,
(iii) City Survey Data, (iv) Government Land Data, (v) QC culled
out information Data Entry, (vi) Holder/GPA details, (vii) Lease
details, (viii) other details, (ix) Issue and Rights and (x) Property
Category.
• Scanning and Indexing documents.
• Operators: (i) Field Data entry of rejected records (surveyed by
government surveyors) rejected records or (ii) Re-data entry of
government rejected records
• Survey Supervisor: (i) Supervisor confirmation
• SP Supervisor: (i) Notice generation for re-survey/document
collection (ii) Notice generation for title enquiry and (iii) Date of
update notice served date
• Enquiry officer: (i) Initial approval from EO (ii) Final approval (iii)
objection entry approval (iv) Objection enquiry decision and (v)
Abstract report.
• Government Surveyor: (i) Confirmation of enquiry process (ii)
Objection entry (iii) Notice generation for objection enquiry and
(iv) Objection endorsement.
• Generation of government surveyor reports and creation of
exception reports and
• Final porting status report for preparation of draft PR cards.
Subsequent to the porting of documents by the SP, the UPOR
software groups the various chaltas27
Third and Final stage of UPOR implementation: Title Enquiry Process
(TEP)
In the third and final stage of UPOR implementation, Title Enquiry
(TE) process is initiated. The TE process is in progress in three cities
(Mysore, Hubli-Dharwad and Shimoga) out of five UPOR cities. Under
TE process, four steps are involved for verifying the ownership claims of
properties and the preparation of draft property cards (DPC). They include:
· Based on the data collected during first and second stages, the title
enquiry process gets initiated by TE team.
· Confirmation of tenure and boundaries of the properties
· Preparation of draft Property Cards
· Preparation of final Property Card, Enquiry Register and Property
Maps
Introduction 23
Flowchart 1.2: Title Enquiry Process
Self Index file consists of:

1. District, Taluk, Town, Zone,
SP Surveyor Check for both spatial and non-
Sector and Block number
spatial documents before and 2. Status of the Property
creating a self index file with 3. Chalta number
scanned documents 4. Sub-Chalta number
5. Name of Town
6. Property Number
7. Division Number
Survey 8. City Survey Number
Supervisor If Accepted
If rejected
Enquiry Officer Notice generation for Title Enquiry
(EO)
Notice generation for Re-

survey/Document Collection
1. Initial Approval from EO
2. Final Approval
3. Objection Entry Approval
4. Objection Enquiry Decision
5. Abstract Report If rejected
1. Confirmation for Enquiry Process

Govt. Surveyor 2. Objection Entry
3. Notice Generation for Enquiry
Objection
4. Objection Endorsement
Preparation of Exception Reports

and Provisional PR cards 1. Biometric Identifications
Objections if any 2. Collection of Original
Documents
15 days Notice Generation
Generation of Draft PR cards
Source: Observations in the field by ISEC team

After the title enquiry process and based on the exception reports,
provisional PR cards are prepared with the generation of a 15-day notice
for any form of objection, and biometric identification of ten finger prints
taken. If there is no objection raised during 15 days and after, provisional
PR cards are issued. PR cards are delivered to the property owners on the
payment of a fixed fee. The structure of fees for property cards depends
on the type of property and measurements.
Compliance with respect to legal aspects of implementation of UPOR
project 28
Efficient service delivery is the essence of UPOR project. To
regulate the relationship with various partners such as (i) service providers
(ii) department of SSLR (iii) project organisation and (iv) key stakeholder
departments, a set of Service Level Agreements (SLAs) have been drawn
for (a) time bound implementation of the project and (b) delivery of services
to the stakeholders. The RFPs clearly mention the legal and commercial
implications of compliance and non-compliance with respect to both SP
and TSP as specified in Volume III of RFP. Besides, all the partners and
participants design their system of functional requirements to enable
compliance with the SLA.
Privacy Protection of UPOR29
There were physical barriers to accessing property records in the
pre-UPOR phase. However, with the computerisation of property records
through UPOR project, SSLR aims to protect the confidentiality of property
ownership details which could be shared only by property owners.
Accordingly, some essential security measures have been taken up by both
SP and TSP for maintaining the property confidentiality of records through
biometrics/PKI.
Provision of Services to External Agencies30
SSLR shares the cadastral data with the public agencies on request
on free-of-cost basis or on case-to-case basis and also if such services are
not listed in the table. Sometimes it may be chargeable using infrastructure
of SP and TSP with the share of revenue being 75 per cent and 15 per cent
respectively. If data is requested by private agencies, such request is studied
by SSLR which enjoys the absolute right to accept or reject it. Further,
such requests are considered on the basis of 75 per cent and 15 per cent
share of revenue.
Introduction 25
UPOR project31 - Expansion Portfolio

In case of any expansion of portfolio or adding more services to the
UPOR project, both SP and TSP shall comply with providing additional
services without any additional charges. Further, both SP and TSP shall
recover the charges only through user charges during provisioning of
services, In case of any services that cannot be related to the existing
category of services, the charges paid to both SP and TSP are decided by
the PMC on 75:15 share ratios.
Channels of Service Delivery32
SSLR is expected to deliver UPOR project services through 1-3
citizen service centres in every city. Channels of service delivery or the
integration process are developed by UPOR project for improving
convenience to citizens and also facilitating efficient service delivery. As
on date, one Citizen Facilitation centre each at Mysore and Shimoga has
been set up. Expected services from UPOR are as follows:
1. Citizen Service Centres (CSCs) are promoted by government
agencies like Nemmadi/Bangalore One /Hubli-Dharwad One for
accessing multiple services including UPOR.
2. UPOR services are delivered through Commercial Internet centres.
3. Citizens can access some services of UPOR through self service
Internet portals.
4. UPOR promotes networking with government establishments and
banks for accessing information from both the sources.
Chart I:
Source: RFP (2009: 11)

1.4.6. Experiences in the Light of UPOR Project

As stated before, the UPOR project has commenced in five cities of
the State. However, a considerable amount of progress has been achieved
only in Mysore with almost 90% of the 2.75 lakh properties identified and
the survey completed. As regards other cities, Hubli-Dharwad (50 per cent)
and Shimoga (70 per cent) have registered good progress. The experiences
gained in Mysore, Hubli-Dharwad and Shimoga are found relevant for the
present analysis as it is a considerably bigger operation compared to other
cities.
Flow Chart 1.3: Stages of UPOR Implementation Process

Introduction 27
Flow Chart 1.4: UPOR Implementation Process
Categorization of Properties
MUDA, Alienated, Private Layout,
KHB Layout, Gramatana, Govt
Land and Ag Land
Issue of Check for

Notice to No various
Owner Document
Yes
Owner submits
Minimum documents
Check for any

mismatch in
the name of
owners
Check for Average Variation

between Measured Area and
Documented Area
If Variation Field Verification

Yes
of 5% by Enquiry Officer
No
Enquiry Officer to Check

for Encroachment of the
Government Land
Encroachment Yes Issue Notice to

the Owner
No
Issue PR
Card

1.4.7. Stakeholder Analysis and Demand for Property Cards

A stakeholder, by definition, is one with an interest or concern in
something. It can be a person, group or organisation having a direct or
indirect stake in an organisation or activity. Although in a project like UPOR,
depending on differing interests, stakes and roles not all are equal, hence
there are primary level and secondary level stakeholders, but all are to be
an integral part of a project. They can be the end users or clients, people
from whom requirements are drawn, people who help, organise and influence
the design and finally people who reap the benefits of a completed project.
These groups can be broadly categorised into executive level, expert level
and end user level. An attempt is made to assess the viability of the major
intervention in the property titling process after a clear understanding of
the problems faced by different types of users of the process and demands
from these quarters before trying to address them.
Key Stakeholders
The Department of Survey, Settlement and Land Records,
Government of Karnataka (GoK), is responsible as per the KLR Act33, for
preparing, maintaining and preserving of spatial and non-spatial data relating
to the ownership of urban properties. The records are maintained in the
form of maps and sketches depicting boundaries and the extent of individual
properties and textual records relating to ownership, land use and other
land-related particulars. At present, these are maintained in a manual form
with new extensions uncovered while only 42 towns have city survey offices.
Urban Local Bodies (ULBs) like municipalities maintain property
records for tax purposes. They maintain Khata records for collection of
property taxes and also for identifying properties.
Urban Development Authorities: Urban Development
Authorities (UDAs) responsible for the development of residential localities;
Karnataka Housing Board (KHB) develops plots and builds residential
premises in urban centres. With regard to the residential localities, a major
role is played by the cooperative housing societies that develop residential
layouts.
Other Stakeholders: In addition to the above, there are other
stakeholders who are considered as the end users of property data like,
banks, courts and lawyers, builders, private agencies etc. In this analysis,
all the issues pertaining to UPOR and the expectations of these agencies
from the project are identified and listed in Chart 2. Thus, all these agencies
are responsible for urban property development coming under the jurisdiction
Introduction 29
of city survey. Hence, the role played by all these stakeholders is more
important and crucial to launching and completing of UPOR. To facilitate
effective coordination within the project, the following action has been
initiated by the government which is considered as the primary stakeholder.
Flow Chart 1.5: Classification of Stakeholders
Stakeholders
Primary
Secondary
Local Development
Private Vendors
Dept of City Authorities
1. Service Provider
Survey 1. Urban Development 1. Slum Dwellers
(SP)
Department 2. Unauthorised
2. Technical Service
2.City Municipal Corporation Settlements
Provider (TSP)
3. Town Planning Authority 3. Other agencies
4. Karnataka Slum Clearance that access UPOR
Board (KSCB) services
5. KIADB and KSSIDC
Civil Society
1. Residential Welfare Land Owners/Clientele 1. Banks
Associations 1. Residential/Commercial 2. Courts and Legal
2. Community Based 2. Builders/Land Developers Experts
Organisations (CBOs) 3. Industries
3. Industrial Associations
As a primary stakeholder, the department of SSLR has finalised a

detailed RFP for SPs and TSPs of the UPOR task, inclusive of documents
for detailing the roles and responsibilities, functional and technical
specifications regarding the responsibilities of SPs and TSPs for the creation
of property records, delivery of services of UPOR, commercial terms and
bid documents, Master Service Agreement etc. The TSP agreements are
also finalised as the exclusive Technical Service provider for the project.
Thus, the government in association with SPs and TSPs has assumed the
role of a primary stakeholder in the UPOR project. From the government
side, a Project Monitoring Unit (PMU) has been established for the project
with over 150 officers working on the project in various roles.
1.4.8. Implementation of UPOR: Constraints Emerged in the

Context of UPOR Process Implementation
The implementation of UPOR project in five pilot cities of Karnataka
has thrown up several process related obstacles, challenges and constraints.
Many of these are known to the various authorities in government and are
being addressed. It is expected that they will be resolved quickly as these if
left unresolved might adversely affect the UPOR, which is a very ambitious
project for establishment of a full- fledged property titling.
These challenges and obstacles may be broadly classified into four
categories viz;
• Operational constraints in Government
• Staff constraints in Government
• Demand related issues in PRCs.
• Problems of linkages in the UPOR process
All these challenges are encountered during the implementation of
UPOR and there have been efforts to resolve them. However, some issues
still persist. Unless these are addressed, they may become hindrances in
the speedy and timely completion of the project. Apart from the macro
issues, there are field level problems, which need to be addressed during
the course of the UPOR implementation to realise the full benefits of the
project.
Operational Constraints
The personnel are required to have a clear understanding of the
problems faced by different stake holders (types of potential users). The
role of SPs and the government in a PPP project is important at every stage
in addition to close supervision. It has been observed that though from the
Department’s side enough staff expertise is available, there are severe
constraints with regard to SPs. While studying the UPOR project
implementation in five cities, some problems, issues and constraints have
been observed. These have been narrated in detail in the preceding sections:
This section has described the existing urban land management
practices in Karnataka. It has analysed various contexts, objectives and
effects of urban land tenure and related practices. While the new and
highly innovative solutions to the existing disintegrated land management
practices appear to support land reforms and thereby promote effective
land governance, there are still certain questions regarding the process of
implementation of UPOR. These include: (i) There is a need for more
Introduction 31
clarity about all the potential stakeholders of UPOR (ii) All the issues and
problems faced during each stage of process implementation and access to
property cards need to be listed (iii) The impact of the problems encountered
must be limited or effectively addressed (iv) It is essential to have good
networking with other departments and organisations and (v) The pricing
strategies must be formulated so that there is an element of cross-subsidy,
which would favour the common non-commercial property owners.
On the basis of the typology of issues raised by the stakeholders, a
set of typology of constraints can be classified. They would include (i)
structural and institutional (ii) operational (iii) demand related (iv) technical
(v) legal and regulatory and (vi) financial constraints. These set of constraints
with respect to stakeholders will be examined in Chapter 1. Chapter 2 will
also address the questions raised and present the scope of stakeholders
influence on existing land administration and management.
CHAPTER 2
REVIEW OF UPOR ACTIVITIES, CHALLENGES,

CONSTRAINTS AND TITLE ENQUIRY PROCESS
The chapter explores typology of legal situations based on Title
Enquiry Process (TEP) database from the field along with the process of
dealing with it and the adequacy of existing arrangements in terms of process
of publicity and strengthening awareness among citizens. A critical
assessment of the TEP of the entire processing, overall potential benefits to
the system and the costs of intervention are also presented.
2.1. Creation of Property Records
Property records are created by following the set procedure which
is presented in the following section:
2.1.1. Status of Survey and Mapping of Properties
The city survey work under UPOR relates to both spatial and non-
spatial data. Progress of the UPOR implementation is traced on the basis
of the review of both spatial and non-spatial work. The overall progress of
UPOR project can be understood from the following Table 2.1, which
contains a summary of all activities pertaining to the project in the four pilot
cities.
Table 2.1: Extent of Progress in Pilot Cities of UPOR, Karnataka
Sl. Action under Mysore Hubli- Bellary Shimoga
No. UPOR/City-wise Dharwad
1 RFP and agreement Jan 1, 2010 Jan 1, 2010 Jan 1, 2010 Jan 1, 2010
signed
2 Estimated total number 286299 2,00,000 NA 81,0000
of properties (initial)
3 Sectors ported 50 23 4 14
4 Completion of work in 100% 55% 27% 93%
terms of coverage of
sectors
5 Collection Documents 286299 200000 NA 81000
from the Department
Agencies
a. Corporation/CMC
b. UDA
contd...
Review of UPOR Activities, Challenges, Constraints... 33
c. KHB
d. Housing Societies
e. KIADB/KSSDC/
SLUM BOARD/Others
f. TOTAL
6 Number of Notices 285296 200000 for only 81000
Issued 4 sectors
7 Collection of Documents 99393 30,265 1000 to 2000 30,991
without issues (Only 5 to 10 (up to
per cent April 4,
4 sectors 2012)
submitted)
8 Identification of 2,86,299 1,31,288 Only 79,374
Property Boundary (measured) (measured) 4 sectors (up to April
4, 2012)
9 Measurement of 2,86,299 Completed Only Completed
Property Coordinates (corners in Dharwad 4 sectors 79,374
identified)
10 Mapping of the 2,86,299 1,31,288 Only 79,374
Property Completed 4 sectors
in Dharwad
11 Verification of On going On going Work Ongoing
Ownership Stopped
12 Issue of Draft PR 22609 276 Work 4000
Stopped records
13 Receiving objections 162 Work in Work Work in
Progress Stopped Progress
14 Issue of Final PR card Yet to be Yet to be Yet to be
issued issued issued
Source: Based on documents and filed level discussions and observations of the
ISEC team, 2012
The implementation process in Mysore and Shimoga has progressed

well and is expected to reach the completion stage soon, with the property
cards being issued. However, in Mangalore and Bellary, the implementation
has not been as per the time-schedule, due to certain operational and
administrative reasons, which are discussed in the following section. In
terms of progress of work, the mapping of properties covered vis-a-vis
total number of properties in each of the pilot cities stands at - Mysore –
100 per cent, Hubli-Dharwad - 66 per cent, Shimoga 98 per cent and Bellary
27 per cent. The task of forwarding approved records for draft property
cards is yet to start in Bellary. However, there has been progress in Mysore
(22609), Hubli-Dharwad (276), and Shimoga (4000).34
2.1.2. Collection of Documents from Residential Property
Development Agencies
The collection of documents from the development agencies plays
a crucial role in validation of the properties. Diverse institutions operate in
urban areas facilitating developmental objectives. The UPOR project at
the first stage collects the documents/details from all the property
development agencies (Urban Development Authority, Karnataka Housing
Board, Cooperative Housing Societies (through Registrar of Co-Operatives),
Karnataka Industrial Area Development Board, Karnataka Small Scale
Industries Development Corporation, Town Planning Department and
Municipal Corporation/Municipalities) in addition to individuals, for
verification purposes.
The land titling process under UPOR entails collection of documents
from the property owners. There are three steps involved in document
collection – (i) generation of individual notice (ii) collection of documents
(iii) verification of documents. These documents are verified with the title
documents received by the residential property development agencies.
Following procedures are adopted in general in the ongoing project.
– After completion of the survey, individual notices are generated
and sent to all the property owners for submitting the necessary
documents to the department as proof of their ownership/title.
– Simultaneously, documents are collected from all the property
development agencies like UDA 35, KHB, CHS (Cooperative
Housing Societies) through Registrar of Co-Operatives, KIADB,
KSSIDC, Town Planning Department and City Municipal
Corporation/Municipalities in addition to the individuals for
verification purposes.
On the basis of spatial data already collected during the survey and
non-spatial data obtained from both the developmental agencies and the
owners, the documents are processed during the verification stage for
enabling the owners to obtain their draft PR cards. Table 2.2 describes the
details of documents collected from the development agencies.
Table 2.2: Properties Estimated and Documents received (prior to TEP) for clearance from Local Bodies
and Property Development Agencies
Local Bodies Mysore Hubli-Dharwad Bellary Shimoga
No. of Documents No. of Documents No. of Documents No. of Documents
properties Received Properties Received properties Received properties Received
(estimated)
City Corporation 172000 146000 1,92,000 30,265 50,000 Work 75,988 30,991
(estimated Stopped
- 2,00,000)
Old City Survey 53,000 53,000 1,00,000 24,579 45,000 NA NA NA
Gramathana properties 30,014 - 53 villages 38 11 villages NA 13,277 6230
(Villages in Area (42 villages) for Hubli- (25 villages)
of Interest) Dharwad 3818
properties
Urban Development 101681 81044 16,000 3668 3000 NA 10628 4655
Authority
Karnataka Slum 390 120 Dharwad-33 161 56 NA 2300 717
Clearance Board and Hubli-
73 Slums
Karnataka Housing 5342 1300 8,000 2256 500 NA 3431 1158
Review of UPOR Activities, Challenges, Constraints...
Board (and only 503

records (maps)
are approved.
Karnataka Industrial 557 15 2000-3000 79 NA 404 284
Area Development
Authority and APMC
35
Source: Compiled information from UPOR-Office-Hubli-Dharwad, Bellary, Mysore, Shimoga (2012)

Notes: Data presented in the table is as of April 2012.
2.1.3. Collection of Documents from Individual Property Owners

At present, for the smooth collection and processing of documents
and records, the department has classified properties into 14 categories, in
three cities and one category in Bellary36. A list of minimum documents
required is prescribed for each category of property for submission and for
processing the title. Details of properties identified and the documents
collected in four pilot cities are presented in Table 2.3.
Table 2.3: Status in Collection of Documents
Details Mysore Hubli Bellary Shimoga
Dharwad
Villages (No. of 42 21 + 32= 53 11 25
Gramathana Properties)
Total properties (No) 286299 2,00,000 - More than 81000
1 lakh
Survey completed 286299 1,31,288 3000 81000
(No. of properties) properties in
4 sectors
Pending survey work None 68,712 11 sectors None
(No. of properties)
Documents received 99383 30,265 Less than 30,991
from property owners 5 per cent
out of ported
4 sectors
Bulk entries complete 25 sectors 9 sectors None 14 sectors
(Porting of data)
Percentage level of 35 15 Not 38
submission of documents furnished
by property owners
Source: UPOR-Office-in five pilot cities of Karnataka
Notes: Data presented in the table is as of April 2012.
Note: Properties are grouped under 13 categories with a list of minimum no of
documents required for submission.
Table 3 indicates that the extent of compliance with regard to the

submission of documents from property owners is around 35 per cent in
Mysore, 15 per cent in Hubli-Dharwad and 38 per cent in Shimoga. The
work has stopped in Bellary.
2.2. Issues in the Creation of Property Records

The current section is organised into 6 sub sections VIZ., details
on mapping, issues in document collection, document submission, issues in
private property development, issues concerning industrial development
agencies and issues of gramathana properties.
2.2.1. Survey and Mapping Issues
City survey is a joint initiative conducted by both the Department
of City Survey-UPOR and UDA. The process involves (i) fixing of the
control points, (ii) creation of boundaries of the properties, (iii) locate actual
position, (iv) identify encroachments, (v) identify property, (vi) issue sale
deeds to property transactions and (vii) conduct verification of documents.
Government of Karnataka (GOK) introduced Capital Value-Based
Property taxation system along with GIS and creation of MIS of all properties
of urban areas. As a part of GIS mapping, separate field survey of all the
properties in the ULBs is conducted for preparing digitalised (MIS database)
ward maps, with unique property ID number. Mysore is among the 57
cities in Karnataka, deploying Municipal e-Governance module introduced
for property tax collection, financial accounting, GIS mapping, Public-
Grievances and redressal, birth and death certificates and ward work. The
module is developed by e-governance foundation in coordination with the
Urban Development Department. There are several constraints in the
process of integrating the City Corporation GIS and UPOR mapping. They
include:
(a) GIS mapping of City Corporation is not linked with the ongoing UPOR
survey mapping. Variations and differences in measurements hinder
integration of city mapping and GIS mapping. However, data sets can
be used for validation of property records. Often there is mismatch of
maps and layouts affecting the integration.
(b) Multiple agencies fixing coordinates is also a matter of concern. Both
GPS (global positioning system) and ETS (Electronic total Stations) do
not match at the field.
(c) GIS is a continuous process and is constantly updated. Hence, it may
not always match with the city survey mapping.
(d) Specific details on properties are not available. For instance, number of
flats in an apartment complex cannot be captured in GIS mapping.
2.2.2. Issues in Document Collection

The process of collection of documents under UPOR is beset with
several constraints such as (i) lack of documents and (ii) insufficient
documents.
i) Khata list maintained by the CMC is not comprehensive enough to
cover and identify all the properties in a city and for document collection
ii) Incomplete transfer of properties to the City Corporation by the urban
property development agencies and non-payment of developmental
charges by the citizens and institutions
iii) Inadequate approval and development of properties from developmental
authorities without conversion of agriculture land / revenue land for
non agricultural purposes and residential use
iv) Issue of integration between UPOR with different local land
developmental agencies with regard to the mapping work.
v) A large number of Gramathana properties do not have proper
documents. However, in some cases, they possess property receipts.
vi) The scenario in Hubli-Dharwad is that nearly 60 per cent of Inam
lands do not possess proper documents.
vii) It is stated that in Bellary about 40 to 60 per cent of the population
possesses ancestral properties over the last three to four generations.
But they have no documents to establish their ownership/title.
viii) There are a substantial number of vacant lands which are prone to
encroachments in the newer extensions without approval.
ix) Properties developed by urban developers without proper conversion
and approval are without authentic property documents.
x) Deciding upon the owners of the vacant lands is difficult.
xi) Insufficient property documents in urban areas are a major problem in
the central city pockets. They usually cannot validate the ownership as
required by the UPOR stipulations.
Table 2.4: Category of Properties and List of Documents
Received from Property Owners only for Ported Sectors-Mysore
and Shimoga
Sl. UPOR City No. of No. of Property Records No. of Properties
No. Property Received from Individual with Insufficient
Property Owners or No Documents
1 Mysore 286299 99393 186514
2 Shimoga 81000 30991 50009
Source: City Survey-UPOR, Mysore and Shimoga (2012)
Notes: Above information belongs to ported sectors as of March 2012
xii) Non-possession of Khatas with respect to revenue lands are rejected

during TE process. For instance, the properties in Hubli-Dharwad area
are mainly in revenue land without proper documents. These properties
are mostly Inam (gifted) properties leased out for an indefinite period.
Further, revenue sites are registered or unregistered but without Khatas.
Similarly, nearly 30 to 40 per cent of revenue sites remain unregularised
without proper Khatas.
xii) Incomplete transfer of properties from development agencies has led
to delay in the process. Mysore city, for example, is one of the oldest
settlements consisting of old layouts without the presence of adequate
mapping and documents to support the ownership of properties. As,
some of the properties are embroiled in disputes, most of the city survey
measurements do not match with the documents received from the
developmental agencies.
xiii) There was a delay in finalising the list for classification of properties by
the department.
Mismatch in Documents
• Non- matching of area with that of official records is an issue as
the actual area in the field does not tally with the norms of approved
plans in records. For example, in Mysore out of the total properties,
36,696 cases have been with area variation and referred for
resurvey.
• Some by-laws and zoning regulations are violated and deviations
are made from the approved laws leading to mismatched entries in
property records. Hence, there is a delay in processing of the
documents.
2.2.3. Issues in Document Submission
• The citizens were not sure about the objectives of UPOR. Hence,
they were reluctant to share their documents. Although efforts
have been made to inform people about the objectives of UPOR,
large sections of the populace still remain unaware about the project.
• In some instances, UPOR staff tried to collect property-related
documents from public without giving prior notice.
• Absentee property owners are not aware of the UPOR process.
• During the verification process, the Department seems to have
insisted on providing specific documents to prove their title. This
has created problems as some property owners do not possess
them or their properties are under litigation.
2.2.4. Issues in Private Property Development

(a) Difficulty in Conversion of Land – Conversion of agricultural land to
non-agricultural purposes without approval from the concerned authorities
creates problems in tracing the actual owners in addition to establishing
their ownership rights. The real estate agents and private land developers
play a significant role in the development of urban properties. The major
issue faced during property development is conversion of agricultural lands
to non-agricultural holdings.
(b)Administrative Process Delays – It was observed that there were
administrative delays in sanctioning of housing projects. These have an
adverse impact on the possession of documents. Delays in the process
could also lead to the manipulation of documents. When delays take place,
it is possible that some real estate agents may create fake documents for
carrying out transactions based on unregistered general power of attorney.
2.2.5.Issues of Industrial Development Agencies: KIADB/KSSIDC
In view of gradual urbanisation process, the industrial areas, being
developed outside the city limits, have come under the limits of city survey
process and they are covered under UPOR. The procedure differs across
pilot cities with regard to collection of documents from industrial units.
Some of the major industrial development agencies in cities include KIADB
and KSSIDC. When it comes to the acquisition of lands, the Department of
Town Planning of the UDA takes decisions on land allotment for industrial
purposes. According to the Karnataka Industrial Act and procedures,
compensation in the form of cash is paid to the farmers concerned after
acquiring property. The acquired property is then allotted to the private
industrial enterprises by the industrial development agencies like KIADB
and KSSIDC or APMC (in the case of agriculture-related activities). These
properties are normally issued on ‘lease-cum-sale basis’, after the completion
of stipulated lease terms and the payment of the compensation amount to
the farmers. Industries will acquire the absolute ownership of the property
through the execution of sale deed and, subsequently the mutation is effected
on change of ownership.
Problems with Sale Deed issued by Development Agencies: There are
certain problems associated with the sale deed issued by KIADB and
KSSIDC to obtain titles.
2.2.6. Issue of Gramathana Properties (Revenue Land)

Another important issue related to the submission of documents is
the coverage of Gramathana properties which were once village
settlements that have got absorbed due to faster urbanisation process over
time. Basically, these lands have been converted to residential pockets without
following the prescribed procedure for land conversion for residential
purposes. For all practical purposes, they are treated as farm house areas
for the local people. Table 5 provides the details of Gramathana properties
coming under urban area and those covered by UPOR in pilot cities. These
do not match with those of city survey conducted by UPOR. Hence, the
documents get rejected during the Title Enquiry process.
Table 2.5: Gramathana Properties in Pilot Cities under UPOR
Details Mysore Hubli- Bellary Shimoga
Dharwad
No. of Villages 42 53 11 25
No. of properties 30014 3818 Work 13277
Stopped
No. of properties NA 38 - 6230
with records
Number of properties with NA 00 - 955
insufficient records
Number of properties NA 3780 - 6997
without records
Notes: Data presented in the table as of April 2012;
2.3. Slums under UPOR project
Slums constitute one of the major portions of settlements in urban
areas. At present, under the UPOR project these areas have been marked
and individual level titling process is yet to start. Survey is conducted only
in slums marking them as individual blocks. Therefore, UPOR has not
processed any individual documents belonging to authorised slums. Table 6
presents the number of authorised and unauthorised slums spread across
pilot cities in Karnataka.
Table 2.6: Details on Slums

Details Hubli- Mysore Bellary Shimoga
Dharwad
Authorised slums 73 Hubli 86 53 48
33 Dhawad
Authorised slums 10 - - -
identified as blocks
No. of unauthorised slums - 72 11 11
Ashraya Colonies 3 7 - -
Source: UPOR-Office-across five pilot cities of Karnataka and Karnataka
Slum Clearance Board (KSCB)
Note: Data presented in the table as of April 2012.
Most of the slums are located either on (i) private (ii) vacant-both
private and Government or (iii) Government lands. It is only authorised
slum dwellers who will receive ‘Hakku Patras’ or ‘Possession certificate’
or ‘Niveshana Patra’ and these documents are issued on lease for a period
of 20 years. Most of the slums located on private and vacant lands are
prone to disputes besides being recognised as unauthorised or illegal habitats.
Even authorised slum dwellers do not possess any documents as a proof of
their stay other than the possession certificates.
Under UPOR, the whole area of authorised slums is declared as a
single Chalta (plot number) and block. Once properties are regularised by
the departments concerned like City Corporation or UDA, these will receive
single chalta numbers and be eligible for draft property cards. There are
three Ashraya colonies built by the City Corporation through beneficiary
contributions in Hubli-Dharwad. These slum dwellers receive ‘Hakku-
Patras’ or lease rights for 20 years. They have to pay a monthly installment
of ` 10 to City Corporation for 20 years. UPOR has issued notices to
authorised slums with Hakku-Patras and Ashraya colonies which could
be eligible for draft PR cards as ‘lease-holders’.
2.4. Obstacles and Constraints in UPOR project
In course of the implementation of the UPOR projects, several process
obstacles, challenges or constraints are being encountered. These challenges
and obstacles may be classified into the following categories viz; (a)
Management and Operational Constraints (b) Technical Problems (c) Lack
of Financial Resources (d) Lack of Information (e) Constraints of
networking with Banks and courts and other groups of stakeholders in legal
fraternity (f) Problems raised by RWAs/CBOs and (g) Industrial Associations
2.4.1. Constraints in Management
Staff Constraints
In order to ensure the successful and timely implementation of a
project like UPOR, the presence of efficient manpower is crucial to manage
the system, both from government and SP side. Staffing was not a problem
for Department and SP for three cities (Table 2.7). Similarly, staff structure
of SP in all pilot cities, had adequate staff except Bellary. Out of 56 to 58
municipal wards in Bellary, only one surveyor was in charge of seven to
eight wards. With the expansion of boundaries, there was no corresponding
increase in the staff strength.
Table 2.7: Staff Details of the Service Provider
Hubli- Mysore Bellary Shimoga
Dharwad
Team/Total Staff 13 96 15 15
No. of helpers 5 per team 5 per team 10 5-6
Index File Team 10 23 None 4
Photo Team 10 10 None 5
Marking Team 3 4 Same as 5
helpers
Survey Team 6 28 ETS 10-14 ETS 20
teams operators
Notes: Data presented in the table is up to March 2012.
Constraints Encountered during Project Implementation
During the implementation of the project, constraints encountered
by the SP and the Department are summarised across the cities (see Table
2.8).
Table 2.8: Constraints Encountered – Project Implementation

Hubli- Mysore Bellary Shimoga
Dharwad
Service Provider
No pre-project plan √
Inefficient project manager √
Manpower shortage √
Financial instability √
Poor Awareness campaign √ √ √ √
Department
Shortage of Manpower √
Technical constraints √ √ √ √
General
Poor coordination between √
Department and SP
Poor confidence among public √ √ √ √
Source: Observations of ISEC team, during field visits
Issues regarding the Service Provider in Bellary
In Bellary, it is observed that the Service Provider was not properly
organised, when compared to his counterparts in other cities.
• Lack of Proper Pre -project Plan – The Service Provider in Bellary
lacked a proper plan for project implementation, like ETS (Electronic
Total Station) mapping/consolidated mapping showing ‘Hissa’, public
roads. The SP did not have pre-planned daily targets to produce DGPs
(Digital Global Positioning) observations and geo-referencing coordinates
for the sectors. It was observed that in sectors No. 8 and 9, all the
DGP observations and coordinates fixed were faulty and errors were
committed during data entry.
• Lacunae in the Project Management - The project management
was equipped only with CAD (Computer Aided Design) operations
(software) and was not trained in field-related survey like fixing survey,
measurements and traverse. The project manager neither conveyed
the field problems nor did he seek assistance from the surveyors on a
day-to-day basis.
• Shortage of Manpower – The shortage of manpower was encountered
in Bellary and this was one of the main reasons for the unsatisfactory
progress in the UPOR project. Work was carried out in only 4 sectors
(which included refixing traverse 10 to 15 per cent, observation, and a

detailed sector-wise survey). Staff attrition was high (every two to
three months), creating delays due to stoppage of work at intervals.
Only a small portion of the staff was employed for the entire city. The
project manager was overburdened as he had to single-handedly manage
implementation across various stages.
2.4.2. Operational Constraints
Some of the operational constraints that were noticed during the
implementation process are:
• Pockets of central old city areas in other cities like Hubli-Dharwad and
Bellary do not have sketches/maps to validate the properties and their
measurements.
• Problems in identifying the exact location of sites for fixing ownership
titles.
• UPOR implementation process is time consuming and involves field
work. This requires lots of time conducting (i) survey of the properties;
(ii) collection of documents; and (iii) fixing ownership titles amidst all
the inconsistencies.
• It was observed that the survey team works as per the official schedule
i.e., starting the survey process at 10 am. However, during weekdays
and working hours, it is difficult to find heads of households which is
affecting the collection of documents from the owners. This trend has
been observed across all the four pilot cities. During the collection of
property documents, generally female members are found to be hesitant
and skeptical to submit property documents in the absence of male
heads of households.
• It was observed that some of the properties are involved in disputes
and litigations in the UPOR area. This is coming in the way of confirming
the titles of such properties.
• At present, the data base does not contain valuation details of properties.
• In addition, accessing documents is difficult at present since updating
of records is slow.
• The basic land records in the departments are not kept updated. It was
noticed that, in some instances, the SPs experienced difficulties in the
field due to lack of protection during the survey process. They felt
threatened by the land grabbers who are not in favour of any survey
process being undertaken. This is happening in spite of the fact that
each team member carries a proper ID card issued by the Department
concerned. SPs express that there is resistance to taking photographs

of properties/building and owners, especially in private layouts.
• The delay in collection/submission of documents by the citizens
unnecessarily burdens the SPs financially as the staff has to be
maintained without work. In all the pilot cities where the implementation
is going on, the progress is slow because of this problem.
Time over-runs: UPOR project had to take into account ground realities
by carrying out a pilot study before fixing the time frame and costs prior to
the RFP finalisation, affecting the time frame and exceeding the actual
fixed target. However, it was not possible to come to a conclusion about
the actual time over-run, as the work was still in progress in all cities; Table
2.9 provides details of time taken and the level of work completed.
Table 2.9: Time Taken for UPOR Project
Sl. Details/ City Hubli- Mysore Shimoga Bellary
No. Dharwad
1. Initial period estimated 9 Months 9 Months 9 Months 9 Months
for completion of work
i.e., up to PR cards stage
(in months)
2 Actual time taken by More than More than More than More than
each project(in months) 24 months 24 months 24 months 24 months
4 Percentage of document 15% 31% 41% Work
collection as compared Stopped
to the total number of
properties
5 Data porting of 9 Sectors 25 Sectors 14 Sectors None
properties to the total
number of properties
Notes: Data presented in table is as of April 2012.
2.4.3. Institutional and Structural Constraints

Another important factor in finalising PR Cards is the level of co-
ordination among the institutional stakeholders and property owners. The
institutional and structural constraints faced during the implementation of
UPOR are listed below:
• Owing to lack of monitoring on the part of institutions, matching of
mapping process is done with the details of documents made available
from other departments and land development bodies (matching spatial
and non-spatial). The details on records are not matching with the field
details collected by the UPOR survey team. This necessitates joint
resurvey with the concerned organisations and in the process, the work
gets delayed.
• Non- matching of area with that of official records of CMC or UDA or
KHB- When the actual area in the field does not tally with that of
allotment in records, the SP cannot go ahead unless the issue is decided
by the SSLR Department.
• Slum areas on private and public areas are without documents. It is
observed that under UPOR these areas are not being covered which
amount to partial coverage of urban properties.
• Financial and other technical problems at SP level are causing
unavoidable delay in the process. This fact has been observed in
Dharwad and Bellary.
• Variation in spatial and non spatial data has been observed in few centres
causing delay in the process.
• Delay due to the requirement of resurvey owing to the presence of
sub-plots or sub- chaltas in a single khata and chalta.
• Multiple agencies fix coordinates which do not match and clash with
the UPOR projections causing unnecessary delays in the process.
• The requirement of bulk data entry system is creating problems for
TEP (Title Enquiry Process).
2.4.4. Technical Problems
It was noticed that some of the problems were encountered at two
levels- (i) field level (ii) software level- causing delays in the processing of
records for draft PR cards. In view of these technical problems, porting of
spatial and non-spatial data was delayed. The technical problems includes:
i. Missing Traverse Points (MTP),
ii. Difficulty in Mapping Multi-storey Buildings,
iii. Problems associated with identifying the backside corners of the plots
particularly urban properties like market area, Gramathana and
congested properties like slums. Similarly, multiple dimensions with
measurements in the form of guntas is an issue as most of the revenue
lands are with irregular units,
iv. Difficult to Survey bushy areas for instance, while 60 per cent of land
in Bellary is alienated land (agriculture/revenue land), nearly 40 per
cent is agriculture land, and many properties remain surrounded by
bushy areas.
v. Problems with Open Site/Rented Properties

vi. Errors during Survey of Properties,
vii. More concentration on Old Sectors, Single Chaltas having Multiple
Khatas
viii. Lack of documents for Government Buildings
ix. Inaccuracies present in documents regarding Property Measurements
for example, HISA/Phodi does not tally with actual measurements of
the project and there is a mismatch between actual enjoyment area
and encroachment of the property
x. Inconvenient timings and number of Centres are few.
2.4.5. Software issues
Issues in Practical Application of Hatching Tool in the Field: Hatching
tool (software TE process tool) automatically clips the physical area of
properties if it is more than 2 feet towards the public domain assets such as
roadside. Hatching tool has been introduced recently to measure variations
in area/length/width etc. Any variation should be less than 2 ft. and more
than 1 ft; if it is more than 2 ft or more than 10 per cent of the samples,
properties are marked for renotice. For instance, any difference in length/
area/breadth of a single property might entail resurvey for the entire block.
Table 2.10 presents details of a field verification conducted on properties in
ported sectors in Shimoga. The table clearly indicates that properties are
subjected to a re-survey or field verifications in the context of area/width/
length differences (with the help of a hatching tool).
Table 2.10: Field Verification of Properties in Ported Sectors in
Shimoga
Sector Total Documents EO-Field/ Completed Area
No. No. of Collected resurvey for draft Difference
Properties PR card
Mysore 286299 99393 43823 22629 36696
Shimoga 75988 30805 2988 578 413
Hubli 200000 30265 800 530 153
Source: City Survey, UPOR-Shimoga
Notes: Data presented in the tables as of March 2012
In Mysore, out of the total properties pending with the surveyors for
verification, 52% are cleared for provisional PR card found with variation
in area. In Shimoga, of the total, 60 per cent of the properties have been
approved and the remaining 40 per cent (413 records) are yet to be approved
due to area mismatches i.e., the presence of a difference between the

actual area occupied and the legally-entitled area. In Hubli-Dharwad,
according to the supervisor login, after the introduction of hatching tool to
verify 6 corners of the plot, out of 800 records approved for draft PR cards,
315 records had complete documents, while 453 records have been sent
for field verification. After the introduction of the Hatching tool, only 215
records are approved for draft PR cards while 153 records are pending
with no length and width details as per the hatching tool.
Other Issues- At present, the processing of UPOR data is getting delayed
owing to the factors explained in Table-2.12 relating to issues of both
hardware and software.
• Server is slow- It is reported that the scanning and uploading of data
takes time.
• Errors in data entry wherein operators might make mistakes which
get noticed and checked during quality check (QC). At present, the
data entry work is outsourced. If data verification is done simultaneously
with the scanning of data, this problem can be avoided. It has been
observed that out of the 43,823 resurveyed properties in Mysore, 7,127
cases (16%) are due to data entry mistakes.
Table 2.11: Software-Related Details in Pilot Cities under UPOR,
Karnataka
Dharwad
Computer system (own) 40 per cent 43 (pieces) None All
Computer systems (rented) 60 per cent 31 (pieces) None None
Training given to CAD 1 week 1 month None One week
operators
Training given to 1 week 1 Week None One week
Data entry operators
Software problems – Yes Yes Work Yes
length/dimension/width Stopped
during validation of properties
Source: UPOR-Office-across five pilot cities of Karnataka
Notes: Data presented in the table as of April 2012.
• During bulk porting, uploading photos and documents is a slow process

which in turn causes undue delays in the processing of documents for
TE process.
Issue of Notice to Property Owners: As per RFP (Request for Proposal),

individual notices will be generated and issued to property owners with a
one-month time frame for submitting list of property related documents.
After issuing notices, photo copies of essential documents are collected
(photos/pictures are being taken since the beginning of the survey). However,
notices are not served in the case of two kinds of properties (i) vacant
sites/plots; and (ii) door locks (DL). In the case of missing notices, some
efforts are being made to trace the notices with the photographs. The service
provider, therefore, contacts land developers to trace residential addresses
before issuing notices to them for submission of property-related documents.
This causes delay in the TE process. Table 2.12 presents details of the
number of notices issued to property owners for submission of documents
as against the total number of properties in the respective pilot cities.
Table 2.12: Notice Issued to Property Owners for Submission of
Documents
Mysore Hubli- Bellary Shimoga
Dharwad
Total No. of Properties 2,86,299 2,00,000 More than 75,988
1 lakh
Notice issued 285296 96,891 For 4 sectors 51416
No. of times notice 3 3 3 3
is issued
Vacant sites 30,000- 60 per cent 60 per cent 40 per cent
MUDA agriculture/ agriculture of vacant and
properties Inam land land agriculture
and 20,000- land
government
properties
2.4.7. Financial Resource Constraints

Insufficient financial resources with the SP affect the project
adversely as observed in Bellary. Table 2.13 presents details of financial
expenditure incurred on the UPOR project implementation across five pilot
cities in Karnataka.
Table 2.13: Financial Expenditure during UPOR Project

Implementation
Mysore Hubli-Dharwad Bellary Shimoga Mangalore
` 9 crore ` 30 lakh ` 80 lakh ` 3,10,00,000 Work
for two years for one year Stopped
Source: S Ps in UPOR-Office-across five pilot cities of Karnataka
It was observed that, in the case of SPs, in Hubli-Dharwad , ` 30
lakh is being spent every month. In Mysore, the SP has spent ` 9 crore,
and, in Shimoga, the SP has spent ` 3.10 crore so far (since 2 years).
2.4.8. Lack of Information/Awareness
Under UPOR, the Department of SSLR is primarily responsible
for popularising the urban property survey work. An exhaustive publicity
drive has been undertaken in this regard. As per the RFP, information or
awareness campaigns were undertaken both by the vendor and the
department; some of the awareness campaign methods followed include –
(i) issue of notice (ii) banners and pamphlets (iii) auto announcements and
(iv) creation of citizen facilitation centres. Across the cities, it was observed
that people had not understood the rationale underlying the UPOR initiative.
There has been a general lack of awareness on the part of the people
towards the conducting of survey and measurements of their properties.
This may be due to various reasons: like in the case of property in revenue
land, owners do not cooperate with the staff during survey because of the
fear of losing the land if they reveal the details, lack of confidence to submit
their property documents to staff either without proper ID cards or do not
possess them at the time of survey. Therefore, staff without ID cards is not
allowed into the property.
2.4.9. Inadequacy in Legal Framework
During the implementation of the UPOR project, individual issues
are to be resolved within the existing framework of rules and regulations
pertaining to land titling. Therefore, it is necessary to list out such situations
where the existing provisions are not sufficient to deal with these issues or
possible situations with certain marginal changes effected in rules as revealed
during the TEP process. Based on the field visits, certain legal issues have
been identified. They indicate the inadequacy in the present legal framework,
as brought out in the following issues -
(i) insufficient document or lack of property documents regarding

Inam/lease/agricultural lands;
(ii) lack of necessary amendments to the existing Land Revenue Act
to make PR cards mandatory
(iii) legal disputes related to the partition suits;
(iv) specific performance law suits;
(v) inadequate compensation in relation to land acquisition cases; and
(vi) the presence of slums and old city area properties in cities.
Legality of PR Cards
a) PR Cards to be made Mandatory – If PR is not made mandatory for all
land transactions, the issue of compliance may not improve. This view
has been endorsed both by bankers and legal experts in the UPOR
project areas. They argued that the new system does not enjoy any
legal sanctity to make it mandatory for the property owners to possess
PR cards. Advocates opined that the present legislations are insufficient
to make PR cards mandatory and called for amendments to the existing
Karnataka Land Revenue Act. Prohibiting or rejecting the multiple
registration of a single property which is possible now, may need an
amendment to the Registration Act.
b) PR cards alone cannot represent Title - On verifying the practicality of
providing legal opinion based on PR Cards, it was observed that many
lawyers held the view that even if property cards are made mandatory,
it will be difficult to give legal opinion based on property cards alone. It
has been observed that the UPOR database will be a standard source
of verification of documents and also help in the authentication of
documents and owners. There are various factors involved in validating
titles. However, in order to accept PR cards as a title proof for all land
transactions, it is also necessary to have all the original supporting
documents.
c) Consideration of exceptional circumstances while issuing PR cards -
Legal experts observe that the issue of property ownership before a
court of law is always subject to tangible proof. Legally, there exist
many exceptional circumstances where registration of transactions is
not done; for instance, oral partition does not require registration. In
Muslim community, oral gifts are permitted and recording of the same
is not mandatory. It is necessary that such exceptional circumstances
based issues are addressed. It is important to seek clarifications when
dealing with these issues before issuing property cards.
Consultations with legal fraternity – It was noticed that lawyers had not
been taken into confidence regarding the project. In view of the fact that
the involvement of stakeholders such as legal experts is very significant, it
would be advisable to consult the legal fraternity on a structured basis.
Updation of records - It is mandatory that details on property tax is updated
and measurement of site are entered within a time frame of 7 to 15 days
and also that transaction details of properties are entered within 45 days.
Documents and Legal verification - Under UPOR, data entry should be
up-to-date. For the successful implementation of the project, certain problems
inherent in the present system should be tackled such as (i) proper
maintenance of records; (ii) easy access of old documents; (iii) regular
updation of records; and (iv) periodic correction of errors in data entry.
Nearly 5 to 10 per cent of the properties in the present project areas do not
have any titles to prove the ownership like no conversion, no tax payment,
no katha etc.
Integration Issues: A major problem is the method of integrating the old
system with the new one. One of the issues was as to how the new system
will be integrated with the old property ownership issues. For instance, city
survey Uthara is an important document that ascertains the ownership of
property in Hubli-Dharwad. This document provides details on property
ownership and even the number of transactions held till date. Advocates
here refer this document to give legal opinions. Now, the question is how
will the new system integrate the old one?
2.4.10. Other Constraints
a) Inadequate institutional coordination between the Department
and the Service Provider – There was a problem of co-ordination in
Bellary, which led to problems. The department officials seemed to be
concerned about (i) lack of a prototype plan for execution of the project;
(ii) lack of complete knowledge on RFP; (iii) insufficient staff; (iv) lack of
experienced and skilled staff; (v) The technical formalities mentioned in
the RFP not binding; and (vi) lack of staff hierarchy to manage the massive
scale of the project.
The SP appeared to have problems like (i) lack of work time ethics
and discipline (ii) miscommunication regarding circulars and invitations for
meetings between the department and the SP project manager. (iii) no proper
guidance to the staff during the survey and measurements. During the
validation of control points and the survey of individual properties, most of
the time the department staff would ignore the practical difficulties faced
by the SP staff (iv) non-cooperation on the part of the government staff in
the field and (v) Department officials not having the required technical
knowledge.
Compulsory requirement of surveyor’s clearance, though
unavoidable, is leading to delays in the process of verification in some cases.
Although it has been going on rather smoothly in Mysore, Shimoga and
Hubli-Dharwad, there are issues which are not forthcoming as in the case
of Bellary. In other cities too, the delay caused in the implementation of the
process has created some friction between SPs and the Department. Inter-
departmental coordination by way of sharing documents/records with UPOR
is not at the expected level, especially in Hubli-Dharwad and Shimoga. The
compliance is satisfactory in Mysore due to extra efforts put in by the SP.
In Bellary, the problem seems to be with the SP.
2.4.11. Stakeholder Suggestions - (Banks, Legal Fraternity, RWA/
CBOs, Industrial Associations)
UPOR project is being implemented for the benefit of different
types of stakeholders. However, it appears that some of them have not
been taken on board, until now, regarding the uses of the titling process and
PR cards. Therefore, it is important to have a clear understanding of the
problems along with the expectations. After meeting some of the stakeholders
in the UPOR project cities, it was seen that their expectations are as shown
below -
1. In the manual process, accessing documents is difficult at present
since the updating of records is too slow. Therefore, fully updated
information should be made available under UPOR.
2. At present the database does not have valuation details of a property.
This should be made available online and the property card should
also carry valuation details.
3. The present system of not having transaction details for ancestral
properties are creating problems in establishing ownership as
generations have passed without entries of changes. A provision
should be made available to consider such cases under UPOR and
establish the rights of the owners.
4. Many homes in new private extensions are occupied without proper
documents. There are many properties that are involved in disputes
and litigations in the UPOR areas. These need to be disposed by
UPOR as per prevailing KLR Act and rules.
5. People expect the database in UPOR to contain all details of the

public places like roads, parks and other public places to enable the
public to protect them from encroachers.
Networking with Banks and UPOR
Banks are an important stakeholder in terms of accessing data on
land mortgage for finalising land transaction and issue of PR card. Similarly,
servicing Banks through UPOR is one of the significant steps for revenue
generation. Banks collect certain list of documents while considering
applications for advancing loans with property as collateral. There are two
types of mortgages namely -
(i) Simple mortgage – this means pledging of documents with the lender
(ii) Equitable mortgage – this means title deed registration.
The minimum requirements in terms of documents are — (a) sale
deed; (b) Khata; (c) EC for past 13 years; (d) property tax receipt; (e)
mother deed; (f) field survey sketch report from sub-registrar office; and
(g) legal opinion. In order to verify the authenticity of documents, bank
officials follow a set of rules to verify the authenticity of documents.
UPOR and Banks: Issue of Integration
Awareness regarding UPOR has not been fully achieved in the
banking sector across cities. The government has to issue circulars pertaining
to the acceptance of PR cards as a legally valid proof of property ownership
for security/mortgage to the banks. It has already issued circulars requesting
the banks to submit documents with details of property mortgages. At
present, Bhoomi for agriculture land and CERSAI37 (software module) for
urban land transactions are available. However, banks say that online
integration of UPOR will take time as it might require a separate module to
update the data. As of now, it is very difficult suggest any specific module
unless UPOR is understood conceptually. To understand the ground realities,
a consultation campaign must be organised at the apex level and also it
should be reviewed regularly. Even after title guarantee by UPOR, bank
decisions rely on a panel of advocates for clearance of documents.
2.4.12. Concerns expressed by Residential Welfare Associations
(RWAs) / Community Based Organisations (CBOs)
Interactions with the RWAs and industrial associations across the
four pilot cities -Mysore, Hubli-Dharwad, Bellary and Shimoga –revealed
that many of them are not aware of the project. The extent of awareness
regarding UPOR is not visible as in the case of the Union Government’s
UID initiative. It was observed that no meetings were held with the RWA
associations in Mysore, Hubli-Dharwad, Bellary and Shimoga to create
awareness about the project. Apartment Associations were also not aware
about the UPOR project. However, a few individual members of these
associations were aware about UPOR through media. Community-based
organisations in Dharwad observed that the UPOR staff had not explained
the need for submission of documents and significance of the property
cards. Insufficient information regarding the project had led to anxiety among
the public.
• One of the basic issues observed by RWAs is improper numbering
of houses present in all the pilot cities.
• RWAs across all the pilot cities said that they were not happy with
the cumbersome procedures involved in obtaining the draft PR
cards. They suggested that the procedures should be simplified
and made user-friendly.
• Some members of the public said that the level of fees was very
high. They also had apprehensions that the fees may increase as
the work involved was heavy.
Collection of document is vital as it provides information to process
property cards and create database in the UPOR project. Resident Welfare
Associations (RWAs) in Mysore informed the ISEC project team during
the field visit that the residents were reluctant to share land details with
staff of the Service Providers, as they did not have proper Identity Cards.
Most of the property owners did not part with their property-related
documents; due to (i) lack of awareness or complete knowledge on benefits
and significance of PR cards (ii) Illiteracy (iii) Akrama-Sakrama property
owners, who did not allow their properties to be measured as they feared
confiscation of property.
In spite of widespread publicity being given to UPOR through
banners, newspapers notifications and issuance of notice to individual
property owners, it was observed that around 70% of the urban residents
are yet to submit their property documents in the five UPOR cities.
2.4.13. Issues Raised by the Industrial Associations
Many industrial associations, across the pilot cities, raised issues
pertaining to title ownership. For instance, associations in Hubli-Dharwad
observed that the ownership transfer is one of the long pending problems
that require immediate attention. If unresolved, it would affect the title
enquiry process as it will become difficult to ascertain the real owners of
the land in industrial estates.
Industrialists are given land on lease period by Karnataka Industrial Area

Development Board (KIADB)/KSSIDC. However, the KIADB/KSSIDC
has not handed over the ownership of property to the industrialists after the
completion of the lease period and the ownership still rests with them.
Despite payment of tax, the ownership of the land still remains with the
KIADB. The industrialists are unable to avail loans from the banks.
Non-Involvement of Industries: The government has neither taken
anyone into confidence in implementing the UPOR project nor has it sent
any communication to the industrial associations. The Chamber of Commerce
and Industries and industrial associations across the pilot cities have no
information on UPOR project. The City Survey and Settlement Department
failed to send any circular to them or held any discussion in this regard. The
Bellary Chamber of Commerce and Industries was unable to discuss or
provide suggestions for the implementation of UPOR project, as they did
not have sufficient information.
2.5. Title Enquiry Process (TEP) - An assessment
The third stage of UPOR project implementation constitutes the
Title Enquiry Process (TEP). Based on the data collected from the four
pilot cities of UPOR, the Title Enquiry (TE) process was found to be in an
advanced stage in two pilot cities, namely Mysore and Shimoga whereas,
in other cities the process is yet to pick-up the momentum.
The TEP is analysed and presented in this section. At present, four
steps are involved in the verification of property titles and the preparation
of draft PR cards (DPC). They include;
(i) Title enquiry process (TEP) initiated by the title enquiry team
(ii) Confirmation of tenure, measurement and boundaries of the
properties
(iii) Generation of draft PR cards and
(iv) Generation of final PR cards
In the first step, the SP submits bulk data (both spatial and non-
spatial data) to the department. Spatial data consists of (i) maps and (ii)
survey measurements of properties, while non-spatial data consists of (i)
documents received from developmental agencies; (ii) documents received
from individual property owners; and (iii) scanned maps and data entry. For
each property, a self-index file is created with scanned documents received
from the property owners. For the submission of documents, in each city,
properties are classified into 14 categories with a prescribed minimum list
of documents to be obtained for title verification.
On acceptance of minimum set of documents, a notice is generated

for the TE process. For the purpose of processing the TE data, a team
comprising an Enquiry Officer (EO), Survey Supervisor (SS) and government
surveyors checks the relevant documents and data received from the ported
data. Separate TE jurisdictional login is created for the purpose of processing
the documents and confirm the approval. The Department of SSLR/UPOR
consists of 6 EOs (Enquiry Officers), 6 SSs (Survey Supervisors) and 15
Surveyors for the city of Mysore. Similarly, the Shimoga team consists of 4
EOs, 2 SSs and 14 government and 30 SP (Service Provider) surveyors.
Based on the data collected during the first and second stages, the
TE process is initiated in the UPOR towns. There are two stages of approval:
they include (i) initial approval from EO; and (ii) final approval from EO.
The work among the TE team is clearly defined through three separate
levels of login, also referred to as levels of blocks. Each member of TE
team is assigned separate blocks before proceeding to the enquiry officer.
MIS reports are generated clearly showing the performance at three levels
of enquiry on a daily basis. The DDLR of pilot cities is responsible for
ensuring compliance and also for sending the daily or weekly reports to the
Government.
The final approval contains remarks revealing the status of TE
process. There are two sets of problems that might be encountered during
the TE process and they include (i) problems related to the survey
measurements which may or may not match (may be less or more); and (ii)
confirmation of ownership by verifying the RTC/RR. After proper
authentication of the documents, the EO proceeds with a manual inquiry/
validation of the property process at different stages. Enquiry decision is
posted on the master database revealing the confirmation or objections. If
the status on property is accepted, an acceptance report is immediately
generated.
After the finalisation of TE process by the EO, biometric finger
prints are taken for verification. Provisional PR cards are prepared along
with the generation of a 15-day notice calling for objections, if any, from
the owners. If there is no objection received over the next 15 days, provisional
PR cards are issued and property owners informed to pay up the requisite
fees for getting final PR cards. Final PR cards are delivered to the property
owner on the payment of a fixed fee depending on the type and size of the
property in accordance with the rules prescribed under UPOR.
2.5.1. An Assessment of Coverage under TEP

Although individual TE data is procured from pilot cities of UPOR,
an assessment of coverage under TE process is done only for the cities of
Mysore and Shimoga while considering the overall progress made therein
and the extent of property coverage. The progress is not satisfactory or not
much is done in other cities. As detailed in Table- 2.14, the extent of coverage
under the TE process in respect to both the cities is quite low — it is about
9 per cent of the total properties surveyed in Shimoga, while it is 3 per cent
in Mysore, though the survey work is almost complete in both the cities.
Table 2.14: Progress in the Title Enquiry Process under UPOR
Sl. Activity Mysore Percentage Shimoga Percentage
No.
1 Total number of properties 286,299 - 81,000 -
2 No of properties surveyed 286,299 100 79,374 98.0
3 Properties in respect of 99,393 35 30,991 38.0
which documents have
been submitted
4 Properties matching with 99,393 35 25,623 32.0
official records
5 Differences in actual 36,696 12.82 413 0.51
measurements & dimensions
mentioned in the documents
6 Properties without documents 186,514 65 45,183 56.0
to show ownership details
7 Documents submitted but 15 - NIL -
rejected after verification
8 Properties not surveyed nil - None -
9 Properties approved by the 22,609 8.0 900 1.11
survey supervisor after the
re-data entry
10 Properties with proper 22,609 8.0 25,623 32.0
documents and approved
11 Property records approved 22,609 8.0 6850 8.5
by TEP team for PR cards
12 No. of draft PR cards issued 22,609 8.0 900 1.11
13 Total number of properties Nil Nil Nil-
in respect of which property
cards issued
Source: UPOR-Office-across pilot cities of Karnataka
Note: Data presented in the table as of April 2012. However, with respect to
Mysore, 6000 property cards are ready for issuing as informed in June
2012.
As Compared to the number of surveyed properties, the number of

property documents submitted has not been satisfactory. The following are
the details -
– The ratio of document submitted to the total number of properties
stands at 35 per cent in Mysore and 38 percent in Shimoga.
– The number of document submitted and the extent of property
details matching those of the official records amount to 35 per cent
for Mysore and 32 percent for Shimoga.
– The TE process completed and approved by the TEP team as related
to the properties works out to 8.0 percent in Mysore and 8.5 percent
in Shimoga.
2.5.2. Robustness of the UPOR System
Pre-porting Procedure Issues – The UPOR system seems to be a robust
one with both spatial and non-spatial details incorporated in the case of land
parcels, structures, buildings, Government lands, open spaces, roads etc as
they are required for preventing ‘benami’(fake) land transactions and
encroachments in urban and rural areas. In addition, the system should be
able to serve as a reliable source of record for all land transactions.
According to the UPOR objectives, the property record cards created under
this project will lend itself for use as evidence of property ownership for all
regulatory and legal purposes. Robustness of the present system can be
assessed based on (i) workload; (ii) expected and actual workload based
on existing information; and (iii) capability to handle the work load in terms
of both time and available resources. UPOR structure has been developed
on the basis of KLR Act, 1964. The Act contains detailed provisions for
survey, title enquiry, appeals, roles and responsibilities of officers. Thus, the
creation of a robust and useful system for the maintenance of land related
records maintenance in urban areas is very timely, especially when a large
number of property frauds are being committed.
Post Porting Procedure issues
Each of the pilot cities under UPOR is following its own methods for
the collection of documents, affecting the progress in data porting for issue
of PR cards in the process. The following table (Table 2.15) indicates city
wise progress with regard to the category of properties, total number of
property records received from institutions, individual property owners, and
properties with insufficient documents and properties without documents.
Table 2.15: Property Documents Received from Owners for

Ported Sectors - in Mysore and Hubli-Dharwad
Sl. City No. of No. of Property No. of No. of
No. Properties Documents Properties Properties
Received from with with No
Individual Insufficient Documents
Property Owners Documents
1 Mysore 286299 99393 186514 186514
2 Hubli Dharwad 40451 1295 3688 41263
Source: City Survey-UPOR, Hubli-Dharwad (2012)
Note: Above information belongs to ported sectors i.e., from 9 sectors out of 44
sectors in Hubli-Dharwad
2.5.3. Work-Load Assessment

In order to address the shortcomings in the existing system, a new
PPP model for the development of urban records has been devised for the
utilisation of available technical skills and manpower to support the UPOR.
The work load is assessed in terms of the number of sectors for each town
and the available surveyors. UPOR in Mysore consists of 50 sectors (with
approximately 5000 properties for each sector) with 30 surveyors,
approximately 2 for each sector. In Shimoga, for 14 sectors there are 14
Government surveyors and 30 SP surveyors. It was noticed that the existing
arrangement of surveyors is sufficient to cover the entire range of properties.
However, in reality, the work was slow and behind schedule.
2.5.4. Time and Resource Requirement to Handle Work Load
Slow progress of UPOR process can be attributed to constraints
like the non-availability of adequate resources, requirement of huge
manpower to cover the entire area and the time consumed for physical
survey of all properties. Apart from this, the burden of mobilising large
financial resources has to be addressed under the UPOR project. The
present staff strength of UPOR project in Mysore and Shimoga and other
cities are presented in Table -2.16
Table 2.16: Department Staff Structure

Dharwad
Project officer 1 2 1 1
Assistant Project Manager 1 1 0 1
Enquiry officer 2 7 2 4
Total no. of surveyors 37 32 5 14 –Dept
engaged initially surveyors
30 SP surveyors
Current no. of surveyors 24 30 5 30-SP surveyors
14-Dept surveyors
No. of Government surveyors 8-10 2 2 2
covering each block
Helpers for Electronic 120 4 10-14 28
Total Station38 from SP
Office Staff at SP office 50 98 15 surveyors- 50
8 regular
surveyors
CADD operators 8-10 7 8 8
Data Entry Operators
Day shift 8-10 23 None 6-8
Night shift 6-8 0 None 6-8
Daily progress reports Yes Yes None Yes
submitted to the Department
2.5.5. Cost and Time Involved: An Assessment to Optimise the

Benefits
Cost Aspects
The cost of the project is mainly in the form of investment in
infrastructure and maintenance. The project implementation cost is incurred
by the private vendors (SP and TSP) selected for the pilot cities as per
RFPs. Similarly, revenue sharing after the sale of property cards and data
usage charges by others is indicated in the RFPs, that is, 20 percent to
government and the rest to the private vendors.
2.5.6. Analysis of TE data base and Typology of Legal Situations
from the Field
The TE database developed during the Title Enquiry Process (TEP)
has thrown up several issues that need to be addressed during the course
of implementation of UPOR, across five pilot cities. These issues assume

special importance, as they emanate from the acceptance process of
property titles and its legality from the point of view of property ownership.
Table 2.17: Property details under TE process in Mysore and
Shimoga
Sl. Category of Properties Mysore Percentage Shimoga Percentage
No.
1 Gramathana Properties 30014 10.48 13277 16.39
2 Urban Development 132244 46.19 10628 13.12
Authority (UDA)
3 Private Alienated Housing 6793 2.40 2852 3.52
Cooperative Society (PALHS)
4 Private Development 46240 16.15 8043 9.93
Authority (PDA)
5 Alienated Land but not 2343 0.82 4575 5.65
approved by MUDA
6 Non-Alienated Land (NAL) 47024 16.42 23613 29.15
7 Government Land with 870 0.30 2187 2.7
Survey No.
8 Government Land 867 0.30 53 0.07
without Survey No.
9 Karnataka Housing Board 5342 1.87 3431 4.24
(KHB)
10 Slum 390 0.14 2300 2.84
11 Alienated by Local Bodies 2838 1.00 6413 7.92
12 Karnataka Industrial Area 557 0.20 404 0.50
Development Board (KIADB)
13 Agriculture Land 2864 1.00 3224 3.98
14 Others 7913 0.28 - -
Total 286299 97.55 81000 100.00
Total number of properties 99393 35.0 29933 37.0
in the approved category
No of properties surveyed 2,86,299 100.0 78230 100.0
under UPOR project
Properties attracting 1,46,000 51.0 19,950 25.50
municipal taxes
Vacant sites 30,000 10.5 28,000 35.79
(MUDA)
Note: Data presented in the table as of April 2012.
The concept of property ownership differs at the individual level in

relation to legal validity and confirmation of property titles. This title
determination process has generated a number of legal situations needing a
different decision-making process. A typology of some such legal situations
which we have come across during the field visits is presented below.
Table 2.17 shows that in Mysore, about 1 lakh properties constituting 35
per cent of the total properties fall under the regular/ approved category,
either developed and allotted by the institutions or alienated for non
agricultural purposes. In the normal circumstances, for the other remaining
properties which constitute around 65 per cent of the total properties, it is
difficult either to establish ownership titles or issue PR cards unless suitable
remedial measures are initiated by the Government by way of regularising
these properties. It is also to be noted that about 18 per cent of the properties
come under revenue/agricultural lands which are not converted to residential
purposes. Therefore, these properties can be covered under UPOR only if
the government regularises the developed properties.
The typology of legal challenges that are emerging during the TE
process is presented here:
• Gramathana properties are shown as part of settlement areas in
records which, in fact, amounts to revenue land titles. However,
perhaps, the titles of these properties can be conferred on the
occupants, in the present day, only after going through a proper
land conversion and alienation process.
• In the case of private cooperative societies, the field situation is
different from the records furnished by the registrar of cooperatives
and societies in terms of deviations from the approved plans for
the layouts, encroachment of CA areas and reserved areas etc.
• There may be properties without land alienation conforming to the
norms laid down for public usage areas, provision for civic facilities
etc. There may also be industrial properties on alienated lands
without conforming to the norms of urban establishments.
• Properties might have come up on private lands without proper
land alienation to be used as residential premises.
• Though properties are developed by the KHB, they were not handed
over to the local authorities with development charges.
• There are industrial properties developed by KIADB and KSSIDC
for the establishment of industries by the individual entrepreneurs,
but no proper titles have been conferred on them.
• Slum areas are properties which are occupied on both private/

government lands. Even in the case of approved slums, only
occupancy certificates have been issued, pending title confirmation.
• There are instances of illegal occupancy of Government lands with
survey numbers, though the encroachers enjoy all the civic amenities
and facilities.
• There are farm houses or agricultural properties with residences
within the urban areas.
• Titles are not available for some urban properties but the residents
have occupied the same for a long time, especially inherited old
houses.
2.5.7. Problems Encountered in the Present Model for TE Process
Some of the problems encountered in the present model of TE process
include: (i) non-submission of documents; (ii) resurvey done due to
measurement errors; (iii) insufficient documents; (iv) introduction of hatching
tool and resurvey due to quality control; (v) area mismatch; (vi) single
property with multiple Khatas; (viii) spatial data creation, a time consuming
and costly activity; and (ix) objections raised during creation of draft PR
cards. Table 2.18 provides elaborate list of constraints faced during four
stages of UPOR implementation.
Table 2.18: Constraints at Different Levels of UPOR
Implementation Process
UPOR Process Constraints at different level of Process
Implementation
Fixing Control Points 1. Multiple agencies fixing control points
2. Erasing traverse points during construction, road
widening or rains
3. Invisibility and missing traverse points
Detailed Survey 1. Lack of Awareness regarding UPOR benefits
of Properties 2. Non-cooperation of the Public for survey
3. Non inclusion of slum properties
4. Mismatching of mapping by developmental agencies
5. Presence of vacant sites
Document Collection 1. Delay in collection of documents
2. Insufficient documents
3. Inam and Gramathana properties without proper valid
documents
4. Lack of documents with respect to Private land
development properties
contd...
5. Delay in categorisation of properties and listing a

minimum set of documents for submission
Title Enquiry Process 1. Non-submission of documents
2. Resurvey due to measurement differences
3. Introduction of Hatching tool and Resurvey due to
quality control
4. Area mismatch
5. Insufficient Documents
6. Single property with multiple Khatas
7. The spatial data creation is a time consuming and
costly activity
8. Objections during the issue of draft PR cards
Technical Problems 1. Lack of documents with respect to government
during TE Process organisations.
2. Difficulty in identification of property corners for the
backside of the plot
3. Problems associated with open sites and rented
properties
4. Non-compliance with the survey of properties
5. Demarcation problem in old city area
6. Detailed survey is not possible easily in the bushy
areas in Bellary city
7. In accuracy in property measurements with regard to
Gramathana properties
8. Inconvenient timings for survey work
9. Problems associated with the private land development
while issuing notices.
Source: Field observations
CHAPTER 3
COST ANALYSIS OF UPOR

The current chapter presents detailed analysis of the cost
components involved in UPOR implementation. It contains two sections:
The first section examines the current levels of cost sharing and the
profitability margin of the vendors in Mysore and Shimoga39. The second
section provides a critical assessment of the project in terms of actionable
suggestions and possible changes in the entire process that could help either
improve its operational effectiveness or reduce the overall cost of
implementation in such a way that the entire process becomes a viable
business over time.
3.1. Cost Analysis of UPOR Project in Five Pilot Cities
The implementation of UPOR project across five cities of Karnataka
is based on the PPP model. Both the Service Provider (SP) and Technical
Service Provider (TSP) are vendors in partnership with the Department
(SSLR) for implementing the project. The UPOR project is supported by
an initial one-time payment made by the government.
The modalities of revenue earned and shared are as follows:
• The department will ensure that all government property owners
purchase PR cards in the first year.
• Payments made towards PR cards and various types of property
records related services rendered to the citizens and government
departments.
3.1.1. Revenue Share Model for both SP and TSP on User Charges
The rates for property records and the pricing of various services40
are determined by a commercial bid amount already submitted by the bidders
to the Department during an initial bidding process. A part of service charges
accrued to the Department is used for management and improvement of
administration of the project. User charges are fixed by the Department to
be collected from the citizens for various UPOR services rendered. The
service charges collected are shared by the Department and the vendors
(both SP and TSP) on an agreed proportion during the bidding. The user
charges are fixed on the basis of type and size of the property backed by
other property development-related aspects like the type of electricity
connection, and also the land use type collected from the municipal records,
etc. Land type may be (i) Commercial and (ii) Residential properties. There
can be a separate slab fixed for lands belonging to economically-weaker

sections. The Department has finalised the RFP while fixing the sharing of
revenue in the following proportion (see Table 3.1):
Table 3.1: Proportion of Revenue Share for UPOR Project
Sl. Entity Percentage share of
No. User Charges
1. SSLR Department 10 per cent
2. Service Provider Not more than 75 per cent
3. Technical Service Provider Not more than 15 per cent
Source: RFP, Volume IA (2009)
Under the commercial bid for the SP for each of the user charge
components, an upper cap equivalent to 75 per cent of the user charge has
been fixed. For TSP, the upper cap is 15 per cent. The minimum rate entered
remains not less than 10 per cent of the upper cap.
Payment model for SP and TSP
Both SP and TSP, as a rule, submit the commercial bid parameters
for various categories of properties and slabs within categories. Payment
to SP and TSP is based on the commercial bids submitted to the Department
across slabs and category (minimum and maximum bid within each slab
and category is also fixed). The average for each slab is arrived at by
adding the minimum and maximum for each slab and divided by 2. A single
weighted average service charge for each bidder is arrived at by multiplying
the percentage figure against each under each category with a single average
rate for each slab and then adding the numbers to arrive at for all slabs
coming under all 5 categories (22 slabs in 5 categories). One number is
arrived at for each bidder, i.e., SP or TSP. Both SP and TSP receive their
payment through two streams (i) a portion of user charge based on the first
time issue of property records to citizens; and (ii) a portion of user charge
for various property record related services.
3.2. Cost Analysis of the Process in Mysore and Shimoga
Five stages are involved in the assessment of cost incurred for the
implementation of UPOR project which are namely: (i) Fixing control points;
(ii) detailed survey; (iii) Document collection (iv) TE process; and (v) Issue
of draft PR cards.
Cost Analysis of UPOR 69
Out of five pilot cities, namely Mysore, Hubli-Dharwad, Shimoga, Bellary

and Mangalore, data from only two cities i.e., Mysore and Shimoga have
been considered for analysing the cost incurred for the implementation of
UPOR project since substantial progress is seen only in these two cities;
other cities are facing different kinds of implementation problems and the
achievement levels are far behind the expectations. The total cost so far
incurred on the project amounts to ` 915.90 lakh for Mysore and ` 375.00
lakh for Shimoga. According to their estimates, the project may be extended
to one more year to complete the initial one time coverage of properties
and needing additional amount of ` 203.50 lakh for Mysore and ` 50.00
lakh for Shimoga. Thus, the total project cost works out to ` 1119.4 lakh for
Mysore and ` 425.00 lakh for Shimoga.
3.3. Cost Analysis-Technical Service Provider (TSP)
As per data that has been shared with the ISEC team during the
field visits, the cost incurred by the TSP under UPOR amounts to ` 999.50
lakh for providing IT related support for Karnataka( Table 3.2). The cost
incurred by the TSP is spread across five UPOR pilot cities and 9 towns
proposed to be covered in Karnataka. A decision is yet to be made regarding
the starting of UPOR implementation across other 9 towns in Karnataka.
Table 3.2: Estimated Investment by TSP for providing
IT Infrastructure (` in lakh)
A Capital Expenses
Sl. Type of Asset Amount
1 Hardware 200.00
2 Network for NOC 5.00
3 System Software and licenses 100.00
4 Development Center Set up 52.00
Total 357.00
B Operational Expenses
Account Head Amount
1 Man-power and Consultancy Charges 500.00
2 Travel Expenses 20.00
3 Internet Charges 20.00
4 Maintenance Charges 100.00
5 Software Subscription charges 2.50
Total Operational Expenses 642.50
Grand Total 999.50
Source: Service Providers, Mysore and Shimoga
3.4. Cost Sharing by Department (UPOR)

The cost shared by the department is based on one-time payment
made to SP as per RFP. Table 3.3 below shows the one-time payment
made across five pilot cities.
Table 3.3: One-Time payment made to Service Providers of
UPOR pilot cities
Sl. UPOR-Pilot Cities Payment made to SP
No. (amount ` in lakh)
1 Mysore 35.00
2 Hubli-Dharwad 35.00
3 Shimoga 17.50
4 Bellary None
5 Mangalore None
6 Technical Service Provider 75.00
Source: UPOR, Department of Survey Settlement, Bangalore, June 2012
Note: Meanwhile, very recently a decision has been made to pay 47 per
cent of the cost incurred to the service provider of Hubli-Dharwad.
According to the RFP terms, the private partners have to complete
the entire UPOR process within 6 years and they have to recover their
investment within this time limit including the profit. The Department will
be responsible for providing UPOR services and collection of user charges.
The SP and TSP have to earn their revenue within the period of six years at
the rate of 75% and 15% respectively from the user charges earned by
selling the property cards.
The proposal is to have a minimum user charge of ` 300 per card.
It is observed that having a proportionately increasable user charge based
on property assessment may not yield enough returns to cover the cost of
the project, from the investors’ point of view. Apart from this, sufficient
revenue will also have to be generated for government, during the process.
Therefore, the alternatives available are –
1) To increase user charges for the first PRC,
2) Increase substantially the user charges for second transaction onwards
and
3) Introducing cost cutting measures with the experience gained so far
wherever possible.
If these decisions are taken, the project may repay the entire
investment made, when the property coverage crosses 75% for Mysore
and 90% for Shimoga. If an increase in user charges is not a feasible
proposition both at the first stage and second stage, then it is necessary to
substantially reduce the investment levels so that the UPOR becomes a
viable project. Given the current scenario, the project could become
economically viable only if the cost is halved for other cities. All necessary
exercises may be carried out to reduce the overall cost of the project
implementation especially in the initial stages of survey work.
Some further suggestions that may be considered are -
a. Increasing user charges to ` 500, 750 and above (like slab wise user
charges less than and up to 750sft., 751-1200 sft. , 1200-2400 and
above 2400 sft.)
b. Increasing the user charges (say by doubling or making it three times)
in case of second transaction and issue of PR card depending on the
type of transaction.
3.5. Improving Effectiveness and Reducing the overall Cost of
UPOR Implementation
The ongoing UPOR process is elaborate in terms of collecting
both spatial and non-spatial data. The creation of spatial data includes both
survey and mapping which is time consuming besides being a costly activity.
The non-spatial data involving (i) document collection and (ii) TE process is
beset by a number of operational and procedural problems as discussed
elaborately in the earlier section. Based on the assessment of the process,
certain changes can be introduced to simplify the process for improving
effectiveness and reducing the overall cost of implementation. These changes
can be implemented at the stages of both spatial and non-spatial data
collection. An alternative method for simplification of the process is
presented below -
i. Spatial Data
Collection of spatial data involves surveying and mapping of
properties. Certain changes that can be introduced, which could include the
following:
a) Stringent quality control checks and verification of work of both the SP
and the Government Surveyor have to be introduced at the time of (i)
Creation of spatial data; (ii) Categorisation of properties; and (iii) a
detailed property survey.
ii. Non-Spatial Data

The creation of non-spatial data involves (i) collection of documents;
(ii) issue of notice (for missing or required documents); and (iii) initiation of
TE process for issuing draft PR cards. Some of the stages which can be
simplified include:
Collection of Documents
The collection of documents constitutes one of the significant steps
in the UPOR process. Documents are collected from both individual property
owners and local property development agencies. Immediately after the
completion of survey of properties, a notice is generated and sent to the
respective property owner to furnish a minimum list of property documents
for verification.
Based on these factors, a revised workflow for the entire UPOR
starting from survey to the issue of PR cards is indicated below
Flow Chart 3.1: A Possible Option of TE Process
Creation of Spatial
Data: Verification by SP and
Govt. Surveyor
Quality control and Categorisation of

stage wise Properties
Monitoring Verification of boundaries
category-wise by SP and
Govt Surveyor
Detailed Survey
Verification of boundaries
by SP and Govt Surveyor
Online Verification of
Communication over Check for Minimum
No Documents –Khata/Sub-
phone/sms/mail Documents registrar office/RTC-
Bhoomi website
Collection of Minimum Check for Area Mismatch and Average

Documents Variation between Measured Area and
Documented Area
Easing restrictions on missing

documents like Khata/title with Field Verification by
If Variation Yes
regard to those staying for more Enquiry Officer
than 20 years in a given city of 5%
No
Enquiry Officer to Check for

Encroachment of the Government
Land
If Encroachment Yes Issue Notice to the

Owner
No
Issue Draft PR Card If objections Enquiry officer
No Issue final PR card
Source: UPOR office, Mysore

3.6. Alternative Feasible Business Model: Implications

A tentative review reveals that with the present cost structure and
the existing pricing proposals, UPOR will not be a feasible project. To
make it operationally viable, either the cost factors have to be rationalised
so that the overall cost involved is reduced substantially or the pricing of
PR cards needs be based on the actual cost involved. From the
implementation angle, it is just not possible to sell PR cards at higher rates
unless they are subsidised by the authorities concerned. Therefore, the
other alternative is to reduce the cost of UPOR process by simplifying the
various steps involved. As for methodological improvements based on review
of experiences in other countries and field experiences, some proposals
that can reduce the process delays are suggested below –
(i) Introducing Mobile Lidars
The Mobile Lidar combines 3-D laser scanning, GPS, inertial
measurement and video technologies to collect highly accurate data quickly,
efficiently and cost effectively. Multiple scanners are mounted on a transport
or utility vehicle, a railway wagon or a custom-built survey vehicle. The
scanners collect 360-degree data while the vehicle travels at pre-
programmed speeds. The data is used for design, modeling and simulation
in 2-D, 3-D and 4-D formats. Using Mobile Lidar to collect the DTM data
may cost significantly less than low-altitude photogrammetry (helicopter)
methods. And it is also quicker. Mobile scanning is much safer than
conventional surveying for many transportation projects. It does not impede
traffic flow.
(ii) Dubai Model of Property Registration and PR cards
At present, PR cards issued under UPOR cannot ensure ‘conclusive
title’ as the process is still in a transition stage. The Dubai model of property
law follows the steps like (i) Measurement of property (ii) Personally
appearing to pick up data related to survey and measurement; (iii) Submission
of relevant documents; (iv) Finalisation; and (v) Maintenance.
Legal issues or any litigation on property are taken on a case-to-
case basis. One of the highlights of Dubai model of property registration
system is ‘no suppression of facts’. A property owner cannot claim the
conclusive title through suppression of facts, particularly, while submitting
documents related to material facts.
(i) Making PR cards Mandatory

In order to ensure that the cost is recovered from the sale of PR
cards, they may be made mandatory across cities and towns of Karnataka
for all categories of property owners. PR cards can be made mandatory
for public service utilities such as (i) Electricity and Gas connection (ii)
Access to water supply, (iii) For any future land transactions, (iv) Approval
of building plans, and (v) for construction license. The justification for making
PR Cards mandatory would be (i) cost recovery and profit and (ii) to spread
up the progress of the work. It was also suggested to simultaneously
implement the UPOR across 9 towns in Karnataka. Further, UPOR services
should be made available to other stakeholders like Banks, legal experts,
registration offices and other commercial applications (such as marketing
research agencies etc).
CHAPTER 4
SUGGESTIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

The final chapter discusses the interventions required at the
administrative, technical, legal, and social levels and makes suggestions
and recommendations. This chapter is divided into 4 sections and, makes
an attempt to analyse the changes that are required at various stages of
project implementation. It recommends appropriate methods to monitor the
progress for achieving the set targets for the successful completion of the
project across the cities.
4.1. Need for Management and Operational Efficiency
Management and operational efficiency are the two important
critical elements for the successful implementation of any project, especially
for realising the specified targets. This section traces the root causes of the
management and operational problems while deriving possible solutions to
resolve them.
Some of the critical management issues that need to be addressed
include -
(i) pilot studies for standardising the RFP (Request for Proposal);
(ii) manpower requirement and efficiency; and
(iii) Infrastructure needs.
Pilot Studies for Standardising the RFP
The RFP has clearly defined the roles of SPs (Service Providers)
and TSPs Technical Service Providers) in addition to providing a broad
framework for the implementation of the project. It is recommended,
therefore, that before structuring the RFP, the department could carry out
small pilot studies to identify the issues before actually implementing the
project. An analysis of these details would help in building a detailed
framework along with time required, keeping in view the issues pertaining
to a specific region/city and ways to resolve them.
Efficiency and Manpower Requirement
It has been observed that the staff is inadequate at the SP level.
The absence of efficient and technically-sound staff is a matter of great
concern. Many of the staff, appointed by the vendors (SPs) in the pilot
cities, were on a temporary contract and inexperienced. This resulted in
delays during project implementation. It is recommended, therefore, that
Suggestions and Recommendations 77
the skilled staff be deployed, after grouping the activities involved like
publicity, GCPs (Global Control Points), surveying, document scanning, title
enquiry and document issuance. Although the overall project responsibility
is shared between the SPs, TSPs and the department, the department’s
role in the project is very crucial to the implementation process, at every
stage and, merits close supervision.
Operational Efficiency
In order to deal with operational difficulties, it is recommended that
a ‘separate cell’ be created and, it may be staffed with knowledgeable,
experienced and well-qualified personnel. Besides this, arrangements should
be made to make use of local information, like using old city survey cards
as reference points, and also to use conventional methods of measurement
to expedite the process. Such arrangements could facilitate better and easier
monitoring and for enforcing the compliance.
4.2. Institutional and Structural Revision
Institutional fragmentation related to the urban land management
is a complex issue that needs to be addressed. Institutions governing urban
land cut across many categories of properties (such as Gramathanas, Inam-
lands, lands developed by the urban development agencies, state housing
boards, slums, private developers etc). Similarly, there are varied policies
related to land development. Division of responsibilities between the city
survey and other local developmental institutions makes urban land
management even more complex, resulting in possible delays in project
implementation, which in turn can escalate the aggregate cost of the project.
To improve the overall performance of the project, it is recommended to
promote effective coordination and networking among various departments.
In the light of this, some of the key areas that need to be addressed will be-
(i) Inter-departmental coordination; and
(ii) Development of a regular monitoring mechanism.
Inter-Departmental Coordination/Networking:
Inter-departmental coordination and, both vertical and horizontal
networking are very critical to the success of the project. Coordination can
happen as described below –
a) Coordination during Survey and the Document Collection
Major hurdles in the implementation of the project relate to the
collection of documents from the local developmental agencies and a
mismatch of survey and mapping details. There exists a mismatch of survey

between the city survey mapping and the developmental agencies (like
UDAs and KHBs). Effective networking among vertical agencies can be
promoted by way of issuing regular circulars with updated information on
the project, as its viability is critical to promoting hassle free land
administration across urban centres.
b) Access to UPOR database
The functioning of other government agencies including municipal
bodies, urban development authorities, town planning authorities, registration
department, survey department, etc. should be monitored to ensure regular
updation of the documents. This in turn will boost the land administration
system and help in easily adapting to the new technologies. In order to
achieve this objective, a policy decision needs to be taken at the government
level for developing comprehensive and up-to-date land use information
data base for effective UPOR project implementation. Such information
must be made available to all concerned organisations and departments for
avoiding the duplication of efforts and confusion. A legal decision on the
cost factor must be arrived at for utilising the UPOR database.
c) Inter/Intra Departmental Coordination
In order to inter-link different departments, it is vital to develop
customised software packages. This would not only help upgrade information
related to any transactions, but also provide automatic transfer facility.
Meanwhile, networking with courts and banks is not only crucial to make
the project a success but also to guarantee a regular source of income to
the primary stakeholders.
d) Linking Banks and Courts
Accessing documents by banks should be made easier in terms of
making the UPOR webpage citizen and banker friendly. In case any mutation
entries are made, they get incorporated in the property records in the form
of numbers. Banks insist on verifying the numbers recorded in the PR
cards. Software packages should be developed for enabling banks and
courts to access the database. Representatives of various banks and courts
may be involved to ensure that UPOR data is used extensively. If these
issues are properly addressed, many instances of criminal complaints
regarding the forgery of documents and multiple financing can be avoided.
e) Promotion of improved coordination between City Survey

Department and the Service Provider-
A smooth coordination within the department particularly between
the partners (i.e., department and the SP is very important for UPOR
implementation. It is recommended that officials representing the SP and
the department should jointly visit sites in addition to helping each other
during the survey. Consultancy programmes and personality development
workshops or training programmes on community skills could be held at the
local level i.e., in the pilot cities themselves for resolving differences, if any,
between the SP and the department.
f) Constituting Regular Monitoring System
It is recommended that one of the important tasks for the project
therefore, would be to introduce a formal monitoring mechanism at the
grass-root level across different levels of administrative hierarchy. Introducing
stage-wise monitoring could significantly reduce unnecessary repetitions
and mistakes being committed in the implementation of the project.
g) Creation of a Special Land Tribunal
The presence of a complex set of institutions governing urban land
management and the absence of a clear mechanism for sharing information
on urban land development have led to an extensive parallel processing
system, hindering the effective implementation of the project. Often the
lack of a proper coordination between different agencies and not so
appropriate policies has impaired its ability in terms of handling urban land-
related disputes. Therefore, a special land tribunal needs to be setup to
resolve disputes/objections related to UPOR process fast.
4.3. Promote Technical Competence
Technical problems involved in the implementation process have
led to considerable delay in the completion of the project in all the five
cities. Most of the technical problems involved relate to two categories
namely -
(i) Field level and
(ii) Software related problems.
Creation of a Special Cell
The Department should set up a special cell to look into all issues
and problems, including matters, like mismatches in spatial and non-spatial
documents received from the different government agencies. This cell can
take up joint-surveys wherever necessary, thus reducing the burden of

UPOR staff. A common database should be created after the measurement
of all the properties so as to avoid mismatches between the records of the
civic agencies and the UPOR department.
The following issues are important and may be decided upon early
in the interest of the proper implementation of the project –
a) Document Collection and RFP
In the future, this issue must be settled while framing the request
for proposal (RFP). The RFP should explain the possible action that needs
to be taken in the event of property owners, failing to produce sufficient
documents. It is recommended that before framing the RFP, a study should
be conducted to help prepare the possible modules required for developing
software for enquiry process (TEP). This also can help save on time and
besides avoiding delays in the implementation of the project.
b) Involvement of City Corporation Bill Collectors
The City Municipal Corporation bill collectors need to be involved
in the collection of documents from the property owners. The bill collectors
can help in tracing Khatas and link it with UPOR data base. Therefore, for
the successful collection of documents, the cooperation of bill collectors is
essential.
c) Insufficient Documents
There are problems associated with lack of sufficient documents.
In view of the situation, two steps would go a long way in dealing with land
related rights and also to formalise through titling confirmation process.
These are –
a. In the absence of title, it is important to recognise the occupancy as a
proof of title in terms of possession by the residents of the property for
a certain stipulated period (like 15 to 20 years).
b. In addition, along with the recognition of occupancy as evidence for
land ownership, obtaining informal evidence, such as tax receipts with
a fair testimony by the neighbours, could significantly increase the
possibility of securing tenure rights in majority of the properties belonging
to Gramathanas, Inam-lands and ancestral properties.
Maintenance of records is directly linked to making PR cards
mandatory. For all the future land transactions, PR cards must be made
mandatory.
Further, to simplify the TE process, the following steps are to be

taken
• Software restrictions may be minimised to enable the title enquiry
officer to function effectively.
• Communications channels must be kept open, like making personal
phone calls, SMS or mails for informing the people concerned instead
of issuing notices personally.
• Enable access to Khata details from Urban Local Bodies, Sub
Registrar’s office and RTC from Bhoomi website to further speed
up the process.
• Removal of restrictions in producing specific set of minimum
documents (like Khata, title deed, mother deed etc for owner with
recent sale deeds, etc), especially for those who are residing in a
particular place for more than 20 years.
• Resurvey the partitioned properties.
• While accepting measurements, the software should be updated
with local measurements to save time and improve quality of work.
Similarly, data space needs to be updated to accommodate large
photos and documents. Manual mistakes should be corrected during
quality checks of the software.
• A legislation entitling PR card should be made mandatory for all
land transactions. This system should completely eliminate the
present khata system/uthara or any other system with all
transactions to be based only on property cards.
• It is to be noted that the present legislations lack required provision
to make PR cards mandatory for all land related transactions.
Karnataka Land Revenue Act should be amended to make PR
cards mandatory for all land transactions.
• It would be useful to have a single system instead of the Khata
System. It would be a logical step to do away with the Khata
system, so that the UPOR system can be established and the
Property Cards made mandatory for all kinds of property
transactions in urban areas.
4.4. Social Aspects
4.4.1. Integration of Stakeholders Demands
The following action could be taken to ascertain and integrate
stakeholder’s demands -
a) Extensive campaigns may be held to elicit the opinion of the people and
find out what they would like to see in the new system.
b) There must be adequate publicity through people’s participation in the
form of consultations and meetings with community-based organisations.
c) There must also be meetings with organisations, like residents-welfare
associations, lions-clubs, youth associations and local level ward meetings
in municipal areas.
d) Such grassroots level publicity would help to enlist the support of the
people from all sections of society.
e) Further, there should be open discussions on the potential benefits to
integrate citizen-friendly and problem-solving approach into UPOR.
Perhaps, some lessons can be learnt from the UID or Aadhaar
project that is being promoted on a massive scale throughout India. As the
submission of documents for Aadhaar has been made mandatory, the
compliance rate is more as compared to UPOR. RWAs and industrial
associations have unanimously observed that what is required is a strong
grass-roots level publicity for evoking public trust and confidence.
4.4.2. Promoting Awareness
An active involvement of stakeholders including banks, advocates,
resident welfare associations and industrial bodies is required to achieve
the expected results of the UPOR project. The potential benefits of the
project should be informed to the public in detail as an informed public
could contribute to an increased compliance rate.
a) It is essential for the department to carry out extensive campaigns to
popularise the system. A strategy should be devised to reach out to the
public through various modes of communication including media
advertisements, news stories, pamphlet and notices distribution,
hoardings, flash mobs and so on. Enough funds should be made available
for publicity campaigns. Local folklore artists could be roped in to spread
awareness regarding the project. Advertisements regarding UPOR
project should be placed at regular intervals in print, television and radio.
Opportunities in social media networking could also be exploited to
disseminate information about the project. The funds required for usage
of these communication tools could be analysed and accordingly used
for publicity. This could result in a better compliance with document
submission.
4.5. Finance
The project cost estimated at the time of RFP varies substantially
from the actual cost arrived at the end of second year of implementation.
This is seen from the financial figures available for Mysore and Shimoga.
In the absence of clarity on such cost escalations and the issue of which
agency is to bear the additional cost, there could be problems in the
implementation of the UPOR. Further, the period of implementation has
exceeded the initial estimation of one year.
a) It is important to work out finer details of costs and sharing of costs
during time overruns.
b) Appropriate Pricing — With the present cost of PRC and the sale
price indicated around Rs.300/ per card, it would not be viable even at
90% of the coverage of the total number of properties. This issue needs
to be examined in detail.
In conclusion, the UPOR, which is under implementation in
Karnataka, is a laudable initiative. It is expected that if some of the
recommendations that have been listed above, are implemented and
appropriate decisions taken in timely manner, the UPOR Project will live
up to its expectations and be a real boon to the citizens, who are residing in
various cities of Karnataka.
NOTES
1
Mckinsey (2001). India the Growth Imperative, Washington DC: Mckinsey
Global Institute.
2
Businessline (2012). Karnataka’s economic growth to slow down to 6.4% in
2011-12, March 20th. www.thehindubusinessline.com.
3
Urban sector reforms are initiated by government of India through JNNURM
Project (2005)-Jawaharlal Nehru Urban Renewal Mission. The mission has
inserted optional land reforms for both rural and urban areas through
computerisation.
4
Nearly 28 per cent of total population lives in urban areas in India (UDP
2009:3).
5
Migration towards the higher order of urban centres, with 66 per cent of the
urban population concentrated in 23 Class I cities. Mysore and Hubli-Dharwad
constitute emerging metropolitan cities in Karnataka (UDP 2009:3).
6
Urban settlement structure in Karnataka is highly dense with 67 per cent of
urban population living in 24 cities (UDP 2009: 5).
7
Nearly 7.8 per cent of the urban population lives in slums in 35 towns of
Karnataka state. According to the NSSO, 58th round (2002), the number of
slums in Karnataka is estimated to be 1983 with 4,83,828 households (UDP
2009: 10).
8
A deed does not in itself prove title, it is merely a record of an isolated
transaction.
9
State laws does not entertain any suit against the state government or any
officer of the state government in respect of a claim to have any entry made in
any record or register maintained by the government or to have any entry
omitted or amended (Wadhwa 2002: 4702).
10
Such as state acquisition of land, court decrees, land orders, partitions,
mortgages, agreements to sell the land etc.
11
Service providers and Technical Service Providers are the part of the private
partnership emerging out of the PPP initiative.
12
Khata means an account maintained by city municipal council (CMC) for
collecting property tax from property owners and it is not an ownership
document.
13
Based on the extracts from the Concept Note of UPOR.
14
UPOR objectives are listed out in City Survey Department-UPOR webpage
www.upor.karnataka.gov.in.
15
UPOR outline and scope are presented in Request for Proposal (2009).
16
Notes from UPOR- Concept Note, page 5.
17
Sourced from UPOR webpage. visit UPOR webpage www.upor.karnataka.gov.in
for more details.
18
Sourced from Request for Proposal (2009:21).
19
UPOR webpage. Visit UPOR webpage www.upor.karnataka.gov.in for more
details.
Notes 85
20
Notes supported from UPOR webpage www.upor.karnataka.gov.in and
Concept Note on UPOR.
21
Regarding control points, a note is taken from UPOR-Concept Note and UPOR
webpage www.upor.karnataka.gov.in.
22
Quantifiable details are collected from UPOR office, Mysore.
23
Quantifiable details presented in this chapter for Mysore is up to December
2011.
24
Coordinates for each property is fixed based on easting, westing, southing
and northing measurements in the city.
25
alienated lands are lands that have been patented.
26
Chalta number means plot number. Sub-Chalta number sub-plot number.
27
Details collected from Circulars (2010-11), UPOR, Department of Revenue,
Bangalore.
28
UPOR webpage, www.upor.karnataka.gov and RFP (2009: 23-24).
29
RFP (2009:20).
30
RFP (2009: 21).
31
source from RFP (2009: 23).
32
Notes from RFP (2009:11).
33
Karnataka Land Registration Act 1964.
34
Since, this is an ongoing project, the data is collected in the year 2012 and
there will be a difference in terms of time gap in data collection, analysis.
35
Urban Development Department, Karnataka Housing Board (KHB), Karnataka
Infrastructure and Development Board (KIADB), Karnataka State Small
Industries Development Corporation (KSSIDC).
36
The city of Bellary has more than 40,000 old city property cards which are
used as reference points for processing the documents and issuing draft PR
cards.
37
CERSAI is a software model for urban Banks introduced by RBI to update
mortgage details.
38
ETS is used for establishing coordinates for four corners (latitude and
longitude) of the property. There are only four companies producing ETS
instruments (i) Topcon (ii) Horizon (iii) Southern and (iv) Wikon.
39
Mysore and Shimoga were chosen as the work has progressed and information
on assessing the cost sharing and profitability are available.
40
Service charge is defined as a money payment made to the vendors i.e., Service
Provider and Technical Service Provider by the Department for various services
delivered to citizens. The service charge for various services rendered depends
on the bids submitted by the respective Vendors.
REFERENCES
Burns, Tony (2004). Computerisation of Land Records: Building on

Karnataka’s Experience, WB0183. Washington DC: The World
Bank.
————— (2007). Land Administration Reform: Indicators of Success,
Future Challenges. Agriculture and Rural Development
Discussion Paper 37. Washington DC: The World Bank.
Chawla, Rajiv (2004). Online Delivery of Land Titles to Rural Farmers in
Karnataka, India. Paper presented at Seminar on ‘Scaling Up
Poverty Reduction: A Global Learning Process and Conference’,
Shanghai, May 25- 27. Accessed from http://web.worldbank.org/
archive/website00819C/WEB/PDF/INDIA_BH.PDF.
Dowall, David E and Giles Clark (1996). A Framework for Reforming
Urban Land Policies in Developing Countries. Washington DC:
The World Bank.
Mckenzie (2001). India the Growth Imperative. Washington DC: Mckinsey
Global Institute.
Mukerji, Anirban (2011). Urban Property Ownership Records: Background
Document. Access from http://www.slideshare.net/anirmukerji/
urban-property-ownership-records-background-document on
November 20, 2011.
Pathak, R D and R S Prasad (2005). Role of E-governance in Tackling
Corruption and Achieving Societal Harmony: Indian Experience.
Paper presented at Workshop on Innovations in Governance and
Public Service to Achieve a Harmonious Society, Beijing:
NAPSIPAG. Accessed from http://www.napsipag.org/pdf/
tackling_corruption.pdf.
Press Note (2011). Press note was released on December 11, 2011 at
Mysore during Chief Minister of Karnataka Mr Sadananda Gowda
visit to distribute UPOR certificates to some Mysore property
owners.
Ramanathan, Swathi (2009). Security of Title to Land in Urban Areas in
Indian Infrastructure Report: Land - A Critical Resource for
Infrastructure. 3iNetwork and Infrastructure Development
Finance Company. New Delhi: Oxford University Press.
Request For Proposal (2009). Selection of Service Provider for Urban
Property Ownership Records Project, Volume I A. Bangalore:
Commissioner Survey Settlement and Land Records.
References 87
Request for Proposal (2009b). Selection of SP for Urban Property

Ownership Records Project, Volume II (Commercial Terms and
Bid Documents), Reference –Notification Number STR: 05 TCS:
4: 09-10. Bangalore: Commissioner Survey Settlement and Land
Records.
Roy, Subir (2007). Bhoomi: A Revolution in Rural Land Record System.
Access from http://ia.rediff.com/money/2007/apr/10spec1.htm.
Sarah, A (2003). Information Technology and Governance. Shamirpet,
AP, India: NALSAR University of Law. Available at http://
loksatta.org/itgovernance.pdf#search
=’Information%20Technology%20%26%20Governance.
The Deccan Herald (2011). Unique ‘Property Cards’ for Mangaloreans,
November 14, 2011, Accessed from http://www.daijiworld.com.
The Hindu (2011). UPOR cards to be Distributed Soon: Pilot Project to be
Impleneted in Five Cities. July 20, 2011. Access from http://
www.thehindu.com/todays-paper/tp-national/tp-karnataka/
upor-cards-to-be-distributed-soon/article2261052.ece.
UDP (2009). Urban Development Policy for Karnataka. Bangalore:
Urban Development Department.
Wadhwa, D C (1989). Guaranteeing Title to Land: A Preliminary Study.
Economic and Political Weekly, 24 (41): 2323-2331+2333-2334.
————— (2002). Guaranteeing Title to Land. Economic and Political
Weekly, 37 (47): 4699-4722.
ABOUT THE AUTHORS
Dr Manasi S is currently working as Associate Professor at the Centre for Research
in Urban Affairs, Institute for Social and Economic Change, Bangalore, India. She
has long time research experience in natural resource management, livelihoods,
pollution abatement with specific focus on water, sanitation and waste management.
Her other research interests are ecology, environmental governance and climate
change and has relevant applied, managerial and practical experience in Karnataka,
Southern India. She has worked in collaborative research studies and authored
several articles in journals and edited books.
Dr K C Smitha, Research Scientist, Centre for Research in Urban Affairs, Institute
for Social and Economic Change, Bengaluru. Her research focuses on urban
governance, service delivery, urban poverty, urban informality, urban political
economy and urban political ecology. She has a PhD in Political Science & Public
Administration from Institute for Social and Economic Change, Bangalore, through
University of Mysore. Over past several years, she has actively engaged in urban
research projects like structure of Indian Metropolis, rural-urban migration, urban
deprivation, urban infrastructure, urban poor and urban land governance from
interdisciplinary perspective. She has published several book chapters and articles
in peer reviewed journals.
Dr N Sivanna PhD in Development Studies is currently working as Adjunct Professor
and Head, Centre for Political Institutions, Governance and Development at the
Institute for Social and Economic Change, Bangalore. He is a development
practitioner, researcher, consultant and trainer with special interest in
decentralization and its process. In a career, spanning more than 24 years, he has
working experience of conducting independent research in areas of political and
administrative decentralization, guiding PhD students, handling projects of World
Bank, Ford Foundation, IDPAD and Governments of India and Karnataka,
conducting training programs to functionaries of local government institutions
like Panchyati Raj Institutions, urban local bodies and as resource person to
government and NGOs. He has served as member on several government bodies,
social and educational institutions. He has a long standing experience and expertise
to carry out research and evaluation studies in the area of rural and urban
governance and development. He has authored 3 books, 5 monographs, 9 working
papers and more than 40 research articles published in various research journals.
Dr P G Chengappa is one of the leading Agricultural Economists of the county. He
served as Vice Chancellor of University of Agricultural Sciences, Bangalore,
currently working as National Professor of the Indian Council of Agricultural
Research at the Institute for Social and Economic Change, Bangalore. He was
member of the working group on Agricultural Marketing of Planning Commission
of India for preparing the 12th Five Year Plan document. He worked as a consultant
in International Food Policy Research Institute, International Plant Genetics
Resource Institute, Rome, International Rice Research Institute, Manila, DSE
Germany and visiting scholar, Universities of Reading and Wales. He was president
(Elect), Indian Society of Agricultural Economics 2012 and currently President,
Agricultural Economics Review Association, New Delhi.
Dr R G Nadadur served in government, as an officer of the Indian Administrative
Service for over three decades. He holds Masters Degrees in Economics from the
University of Madras, and University of Notre Dame, USA and a Doctorate in
Economics from the University of Mysore. He has rich knowledge and experience
in various sectors. Since his retirement from government, Dr. Nadadur has served
as Adjunct Professor and Visiting Professor at Institute for Social and Economic
Change and Chief Operating Officer of Sri Sri Ravishankar Vidya Mandir Trust, Art
of Living. Dr. Nadadur is now serving on the Boards of some NGOs working in
fields - sustainable development, education, agriculture, environment, health, skill
development, capacity building, and leadership development.
MONOGRAPH SERIES
MONOGRAPH SERIES 1. Volume and Composition of Budgetary Subsidies in Karnataka –
M Govinda Rao (Ed)
2. Coarse Cereals in a Drought-Prone Region: A Study in Karnataka –
Number 43 November 2015 R S Deshpande and V M Rao
ISBN 81-7791-142-2 3. Prevalence of Iron Deficiency Anaemia and Malnutrition in India –
Dr M Ramakrishna Reddy
4. Micro-Finance, Poverty Alleviation and Empowerment of Women: A Study of
Series Editor: Anand Inbanathan Two NGOs from Andhra Pradesh and Karnataka – D Rajasekhar
5. Fertility Transition in Karnataka – T V Sekher and K N M Raju
© 2015, Copyright Reserved 6. Development Policies, Priorities and Sustainability Perspectives in
The Institute for Social and Economic Change India – Shashanka Bhide and Jeena T Srinivasan
Bangalore 7. Moon in the Mirror: Farmers and Minimum Support Prices in
Karnataka – R S Deshpande and T Raveendra Naik
8. Dimensions of Social Development: Status, Challenges and
Prospects – G K Karanth (Ed)
The Institute for Social and Economic Change (ISEC) is engaged in
9. At Loggerheads or Towards Sustainability? Changing Rural Livelihood Systems
interdisciplinary research in analytical and applied areas of social and Natural Resource Management – G K Karanth and V Ramaswamy
sciences, encompassing diverse aspects of change and development. 10. Role of NGOs in Promoting Non-Formal Environmental Education:
A Case Study – K Yeshodhara
ISEC works with central, state and local governments as well as 11. Public Health and Punchayati Raj Institutions in Karnataka –
international agencies by undertaking systematic studies of resource T V Sekher, Shashanka Bhide, MD Nazrul Islam and Monica Das Gupta
potential, identifying factors influencing growth and examining 12. Panchayats and Watershed Development: An Assessment of Institutional
Capacity – N Sivanna, M Gopinath Reddy, with the Assistance of M Srinivasa Reddy
measures for reducing poverty. The thrust areas of research include 13. Government Spending on Selected Public Health Services in India: Central,
State and the Local Governments – S Puttaswamaiah and Shashanka Bhide
state and local economic policies, issues relating to sociological and
14. Against Gravity?: RIDF and the Challenges to Balanced Development
demographic transition, environmental issues and fiscal, of Infrastructure – Meenakshi Rajeev
administrative and political decentralization and governance. It 15. Trends and Patterns of Migration: Interface with Education – A Case
of the North-Eastern Region – U A Shimray and M D Ushadevi
pursues fruitful contacts with other institutions and scholars devoted
16. Has the SHG-Bank Linkage Helped the Poor Gain Access to Capital?:
to social science research through collaborative research A Comparative Study between Karnataka and Gujarat – Veerashekharappa,
H S Shylendra and Samapti Guha
programmes, seminars, etc.
17. Vanishing Lakes: A Study of Bangalore City – P Thippaiah
18. Regulating Competition – S L Rao
The Social and Economic Change Monograph Series provides an
19. Decentralised Planning in Karnataka: Realities and Prospects –
opportunity for ISEC faculty, visting fellows and PhD scholars to M Devendra Babu
disseminate their ideas and research work. Monographs in the series 20. Reaching the Unreached (A Case Study of Dairy Farming among the
BCs in Karnataka) – Manohar S Yadav
present empirical analyses and generally deal with wider issues of
21. Dynamics of Population change in Karnataka: An Overview – C M Lakshmana
public policy at a sectoral, regional or national level. 22. Mirage of Social Mobility: The Case of Safai Karmacharis in
Karnataka – K G Gayathri Devi
23. Decentralised Governance and Service Delivery: Affordability of Drinking
Water Supply by Gram Panchayats in Karnataka – D Rajasekhar and R Manjula
Publication of this Monograph has been made possible through the 24. Incidence of Poverty among Social Groups in Rural India: Who are the Poorest
and Why? - R R Biradar
generous support of Sir Ratan Tata Deferred Endowment Fund.
25. History of Monetary Policy in India since Independence – Ashima Goyal
26. Inequality, Rents and the Long-run Transformation of India – Michael Walton
(Please see overleaf)
MONOGRAPH SERIES SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC
27. Public Expenditure and Strategies for Sustainable
Management of Enviroment and Forest Ecosystems
in Karnataka – Sunil Nautiyal, M S Umesh Babu and
CHANGE MONOGRAPHS
B P Nayak
28. Has Revival Package Improved Functioning of
Short-term Cooperative Credit Societies? - A Case
Study of Madhya Pradesh - Veerashekharappa,
Meenakshi Rajeev and Manojit Battacharjee
29. Politics of Exclusion: The Case of Panchayats in
South India - Anand Inbanathan and N Sivanna
30. Population Growth, Natural Resource Degradation
and Environmental Pollution in India -
43
SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC CHANGE MONOGRAPHS - 43

C M Lakshmana
31. Urban Governance and Organisational Restructuring:
The Case of Bruhat Bangalore Mahanagara Palike
(BBMP) - N Sivanna Land Policy and
32. Managing India’s Forests: Village Communities,
Panchayati Raj Institutions and the State - Administration in Karnataka
P J Dilip Kumar
33. Evaluation of Western Ghats Development Programmes Urban Property Ownership Records -
(WGDP) and Policy Recommendations: A Case Study
from Karnataka - Sunil Nautiyal, S Manasi and The Karnataka Experience
M S Umesh Babu
34. Government Subsidies in Karnataka - K Gayithri (Ed)
35. Green Business for Greening Karnataka: A Study of Coir
Industry - Krishna Raj
36. Conservation through Culture in Urban Ecosystems: A
Case Study from Bangalore, India - K V Raju, S Manasi, S Manasi
Sunil Nautiyal and K P Rashmi
37. Study on the Production and Profitability of Pulses and
K C Smitha
Beans in India - A Case Study of Karnataka -
Sunil Nautiyal, S Manasi, M S Umesh Babu and K S Rao N Sivanna
38. Financial Inclusion to Livelihood: Entangled to Gain -
Veerashekharappa and B P Vani
P G Chengappa
39. E-waste Management in Urban Cities: A Situation R G Nadadur
Analysis of Bangalore - S Manasi, N Latha and Bibhu Prasad
Nayak
40. Financial Inclusion through SHGs: Understanding
Quality and Sustainability of SHGs in Karnataka State -
Meenakshi Rajeev, B P Vani and Veerashekharappa
41. Ethnobotany and Medicinal Plants Conservation through
Scientific and Technological Interventions - A Case Study
from BRTTR, Karnataka - Sunil Nautiyal, N P Varsha,
Sravani Mannam and C Rajasekaran
42. Land Policy and Administration in Karnataka - Bhoomi-
KAVERI-Mojini Integration - S Manasi, B R Hemalatha, N
Sivanna, R G Nadadur and P G Chengappa
Published by: INSTITUTE FOR SOCIAL AND
The Registrar
Institute for Social and Economic Change ISBN 81-7791-142-2 ECONOMIC CHANGE
Dr VKRV Rao Road, Nagarabhavi P.O., Bangalore
Bangalore - 560 072 November 2015 2015
Phone: 23215468, 23215519, 23215592
E-mail: admn@isec.ac.in ` 110
Web: http://www.isec.ac.in www.isec.ac.in
View publication stats

Land Policy and Administration in Karnataka

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Land Policy and Administration in Karnataka

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

Land Policy and Administration - Urban Property Ownership Records - The

Book · January 2015

S. Manasi Smitha Kanekanti Chandrashekar

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC CHANGE MONOGRAPHS - 43

Land Policy and Administration

Institute for Social and Economic Change

August 2015 M R Narayana

Abbreviations and Glossary v

CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION 1-31

CHAPTER 2 REVIEW OF UPOR ACTIVITIES, CHALLENGES, 32-66

CHAPTER 3 COST ANALYSIS OF UPOR 67-75

CHAPTER 4 SUGGESTIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 76-83

LIST OF FLOW CHARTS

estimated to grow at 6.4 per cent (according to the Economic Survey of

industries, rural-urban divide resulting in mass exodus of migrants from

5). Typically, urban land regulations are influenced by zoning, regulated

have led to peri-urban conflicts with refusal from villages to accommodate

Settlement and Land Records Department, the Government of

The respective Deputy Directors of Land Records (DDLRs)17 have

Table 1.1: User Charges Fixed for Property Record-Related

Any property @ 1% of the Twice the Not To be collected

Operational Features of UPOR19

Governance Structure: Project Monitoring - The progress of each city

There are four stages of city survey:

Flow Chart 1.1: UPOR Second Stage Implementation Process in

Generation of Preliminary index map

Data Entry of all Secondary source data

Validation of Survey by Validation of

Submission of Spatial and

Source: UPOR Office, Mysore

Table 1.2: Stakeholder Categories and a List of Minimum

e) Possession certificate issued by KHB

As each individual property is unique, in terms of coordinate24

public establishments in the city for measuring individual plots/sites and

Flowchart 1.2: Title Enquiry Process

Self Index file consists of:

Notice generation for Re-

1. Confirmation for Enquiry Process

Preparation of Exception Reports

15 days Notice Generation

Generation of Draft PR cards

Source: Observations in the field by ISEC team

UPOR project31 - Expansion Portfolio

Source: RFP (2009: 11)

1.4.6. Experiences in the Light of UPOR Project

Source: UPOR Office, Mysore

Flow Chart 1.4: UPOR Implementation Process

Issue of Check for

Check for any

Check for Average Variation

If Variation Field Verification

Enquiry Officer to Check

Encroachment Yes Issue Notice to

Source: UPOR Office, Mysore

1.4.7. Stakeholder Analysis and Demand for Property Cards

As a primary stakeholder, the department of SSLR has finalised a

1.4.8. Implementation of UPOR: Constraints Emerged in the

REVIEW OF UPOR ACTIVITIES, CHALLENGES,

The implementation process in Mysore and Shimoga has progressed

Board (and only 503

Source: Compiled information from UPOR-Office-Hubli-Dharwad, Bellary, Mysore, Shimoga (2012)