A startling investigation by the Committee on Public Enterprises (COPE) has uncovered what its Chairman Dr. Nishantha Samaraweera describes as a potential “criminal offence” and a “conspiracy” within the Land Reform Commission (LRC).
The probe has revealed a deeply concerning case where a deceased individual’s signature and fingerprint had allegedly appeared on official land documents years after his death, raising serious questions about systemic fraud and accountability.
The central figure in this unfolding drama is Charles Neville Udalagama, a beneficiary under land reform regulations.
Under the Land Reform Act, a statutory ceiling was imposed on the ownership of agricultural land. As per this legislation, no individual or private company could own more than 50 acres of agricultural land or 25 acres of paddy land. Any land held in excess of this ceiling was vested in the LRC, which then had the authority to redistribute it to landless peasants or for other public purposes.
Udalagama was initially entitled to a maximum of 50 acres of land. He was allocated 44 acres in Kongasyaya, Matale. However, Udalagama had claimed that this plot was occupied by unauthorised settlers and had requested an alternative.
In response, the LRC had reallocated him two parcels totalling 24 acres in Udawalawatta. While Udalagama had accepted this new allocation, he crucially did not formalise the relinquishment of the Kongasyaya property, leaving the matter in an ambiguous state.
Internal investigations and legal ramifications
It was only through an internal audit initiated by the Director General of the LRC that Udalagama’s death was officially recognised. Legally, a power of attorney automatically becomes void upon the death of the grantor, rendering any subsequent actions taken under such authority invalid.
COPE members strongly condemned the department’s conduct, characterising it as a grave instance of administrative failure. Concerns were also voiced regarding the unauthorised sale of land belonging to other parties, a pervasive lack of accountability, and the apparent forgery of official documents.
Highlighting the LRC’s deep involvement, Dr. Samaraweera said: “When we take into account the age of Neville Udalagama, his ability to travel, to place signatures, and to comprehend documents and other factors, we feel that there had been some participation of the LRC.
“If not for some level of participation, it is not practical that such an event would have taken place. It is either a case of complete forgery and fraud by an external entity, or somebody within the LRC has played around to enable such fraudulent activity to take place.”
As of now, Dr. Samaraweera confirmed that a formal complaint had yet to be filed with the Commission to Investigate Allegations of Bribery or Corruption (CIABOC). However, a comprehensive file on the case is being maintained and COPE is continuing its investigations to gather further evidence.
“We are doing this to obtain the support of the LRC,” he explained. “When we have concluded our investigations, we will proceed to file a case based on our findings.”
LRC Chair’s response
Speaking to The Sunday Morning, LRC Chairman R.K. Nihal offered his perspective on the contentious issues raised by COPE and shed light on the LRC’s ongoing efforts to modernise and enhance transparency.
Addressing the specific incident concerning the deceased landowner, Nihal confirmed that the matter had indeed been a focal point at the recent COPE meeting. “Our officers responded and the committee instructed the Ministry Secretary to initiate an inquiry,” he stated.
He further detailed: “In parallel, the LRC has also launched its own internal investigation, which has been handed over to an independent investigating officer. We are now awaiting the final report, which will be submitted to COPE in due course.”
Systemic lapses, not outdated systems
When questioned about the perceived outdatedness of the LRC’s systems, particularly in tracking applicant eligibility and status, Nihal drew a critical distinction. He clarified: “We do have a system in place to evaluate land requests, including checking the original files and verifying the identity and eligibility of applicants.”
He attributed the current problem to a breakdown in execution, explaining: “In this particular case, the established procedures were not followed properly, which is why the Auditor General flagged the issue in the 2023 report. The problem wasn’t with the system itself, but with its implementation.”
Despite this, he acknowledged the necessity of progress, stating: “That said, we have recognised the need to modernise.”
Nationwide modernisation drive underway
To address long-standing documentation gaps, the LRC Chairman revealed a significant nationwide initiative. “We have already initiated efforts to survey and map LRC lands, many of which haven’t been properly documented,” Nihal explained.
Elaborating on the scope, he said: “This process began only recently. We are gathering data, including GPS coordinates, and integrating that information into our system.” He clarified that this was a specific LRC project and was not connected, or similar, to the past ‘Divineguma’ programme.
Nihal underscored the project’s importance, stating: “It will be nationwide. LRC lands are distributed throughout the country, and our goal is to comprehensively map and identify all properties under our purview. For over 15 years or more, there has been no complete mapping. Therefore, this is a crucial first step in bringing those records up to date.”
Tackling encroachments and unauthorised structures
Regarding the pervasive issue of unauthorised structures and encroachments on LRC lands, Nihal affirmed the commission’s commitment. “If such structures are found on land still under the LRC, we will take appropriate action,” he stated.
However, he noted that jurisdiction would shift if lands had been transferred to other State agencies, such as the Sri Lanka State Plantations Corporation or the Janatha Estates Development Board, in which case enforcement would become their responsibility. “We are responsible for LRC-retained lands,” he affirmed.
Prioritising regularisation and legal ownership
Having recently assumed his role, Nihal highlighted regularisation as a paramount challenge. “Many lands were issued on a lease basis but never formalised,” he observed. He pointed to approximately 15,000 land allotments where low-income families have resided for decades, some for over 30-40 years, without formal legal documents.
The Chairman emphasised the LRC’s core objective: “Our aim is to regularise these holdings and issue proper deeds or lease documents so that these people have legal ownership.”
This ongoing probe into the LRC is set to reveal more details about what appears to be a sophisticated scheme of land fraud with significant implications for public trust and institutional accountability.