TDP Embarrassed After Retd IAS Officer Edited Tweet on Land Titling Act
As elections approach, the opposition Telugu Desam Party and some media outlets friendly to them are trying to gain political mileage from the debate surrounding the Andhra Pradesh Land Titling Act, 2023 (APLTA). The opposition had previously criticised this act and is now attempting to sabotage it by spreading misinformation among the people.
Desperate to corner the ruling government just days before the assembly and Lok Sabha elections in the state, the opposition has brought up the issue of the Land Titling Act, which has not even become law yet. The party is using some friendly media outlets to mislead the public and try to regain lost ground before the polls.
Meanwhile, PV Ramesh, a retired IAS officer, tweeted claiming to be a victim of the Land Titling Act while mentioning details about his land. The opposition camp seized upon this claim and started using his tweet to target the YSRCP government. Without delving into the details, Nara Lokesh began criticising the government over the retired official's tweet.
However, upon investigation into the land claimed by Ramesh, it was revealed that the land issue has been pending in court for the last three years. The court also ordered a hearing on the land in a writ petition filed in the High Court. It was found that some private individuals had encroached upon government land and assigned lands and built fish ponds on these lands without permission.
The writ petition revealed that despite a court order no action was taken against those who encroached upon the lands and all the fish ponds set up were unauthorised and illegally constructed. The court suggested that no one should be allowed to enter these lands. However, the retired officer chose to hide the fact that the court suggested conducting a joint survey of the land and instead tweeted about the injustice done to him which seems to be misleading the public.
Realising the seriousness of his tweet in the current political scenario, the retired officer edited his tweet to clear up any misunderstanding arising from his social media post. Initially, he directly claimed to be a victim of the act, but later edited his tweet after someone questioned how he could be a victim of a law that was not in force yet.
