‘Bhu Bharati’ on the same path as Dharani: Major registration fee scam exposes systemic flaws

The Congress government, which had strongly criticised the previous BRS regime’s Dharani land records system and promised to scrap it, introduced the Bhu Bharati Act as a supposedly robust alternative after coming to power. However, recent revelations of a massive scam in land registration fee payments have triggered allegations that Bhu Bharati is merely “old wine in a new bottle,” continuing many of the same flaws that plagued Dharani.

The controversy erupted after it came to light that in Yadadri Bhuvanagiri and Jangaon districts, agricultural land registrations were carried out by paying as little as 1% of the required registration fee, while the remaining 99% was siphoned off by some online service centres and Mee Seva operators. These irregularities, allegedly enabled by loopholes in the Bhu Bharati software and the absence of effective audits, have caused a major loss to the State exchequer and sparked statewide outrage.

Agricultural land registrations are currently handled at Tahsildar offices, while non-agricultural and commercial property registrations continue under the Registration and Stamps Department. Earlier, Tahsildars were also given joint sub-registrar powers, but they flagged the process as an added administrative burden. Eventually, only agricultural land registrations were retained at Tahsildar offices.

This separation, critics say, resulted in weak supervision over agricultural land registrations. Unlike sub-registrar offices, Tahsildar offices lack dedicated staff, robust verification mechanisms, and regular departmental audits. As a result, registration processes in agriculture-related transactions are alleged to have been carried out with minimal scrutiny.

Non-agricultural property registrations follow a stringent process. Registration officials meticulously verify document values, stamp duty, and fee payments using software tools such as challan payment and cross-verification. Monthly and quarterly inspections, along with periodic audits and field checks, ensure that even minor discrepancies are caught.

This level of scrutiny, however, is absent in agricultural land registrations under Bhu Bharati. Officials often rely only on a “transaction successful” status displayed on the system, without the ability to cross-check whether the full amount due was actually paid.

Software loopholes at the heart of the scam

The core problem, officials and experts say, lies in the software of Bhu Bharati. Although users can see the market value and payable charges, loopholes allow the payable amount to be manipulated during the payment gateway stage. Once the transaction is marked successful and redirected back to the portal, Tahsildars have no technical means to compare the payable amount with the actual amount credited to the treasury.

The lack of a challan verification system for agricultural land registrations, coupled with heavy workload and dependence on operators, is believed to have enabled the scam. Police have already detained three key accused, and investigations suggest more people may be involved. A high-level committee has been constituted to probe the issue statewide.

Notices to farmers spark backlash

In the aftermath, Tahsildars in Nalgonda and Jangaon districts have issued notices to farmers who registered land through low-value challans, asking them to pay the remaining amount to regularise documents. This has caused deep distress among farmers, who argue that they paid the amounts demanded by online and MeeSeva centres and should not be punished for administrative failures.

Farmers have demanded that responsibility be fixed on those who manipulated the system, rather than making cultivators scapegoats for faults they neither committed nor understood.

There is growing consensus among officials and observers that both agricultural and non-agricultural land registrations should be brought back entirely under the Registration and Stamps Department, where established checks and accountability mechanisms exist. Many believe this is the only way to prevent a recurrence of such large-scale revenue losses.