The initial steps of the process—photography and biometric capture—are completed with commendable efficiency. Even with a short waiting period of five to fifteen minutes, depending on the number of registrations scheduled for the day, this stage rarely takes more than a minute per individual. At this point, the system appears well-organized and responsive, creating a reasonable expectation that the remaining procedures will follow the same pattern.
However, this expectation quickly fades.
From around morning duty hours onwards, applicants are made to wait for the most critical and time-consuming phase of the registration process: personal identification and verification in the presence of the Sub-Divisional Magistrate (SDM). This is the stage where purchasers and sellers must physically present themselves to establish that the documents submitted—primarily Aadhaar and PAN—indeed belong to them. While the objective of preventing fraud and ensuring authenticity is unquestionable, the manner in which this verification is carried out creates a severe bottleneck.
The SDM, already burdened with multiple essential administrative and executive responsibilities, is also entrusted with this routine verification duty. As a result, applicants remain seated or standing for hours—often from morning until late in the evenings with no defined time slots, no predictable sequence, and no assurance that their verification will be completed on the same day. On some days, only a few people wait; on others, the number runs into hundreds. On rare occasions many leave without completion, having lost an entire working day.
The actual act of verification itself takes only a few minutes per person. The prolonged waiting is therefore not due to procedural complexity, but due to over-centralization of authority and lack of structured time management. Ironically, after verification by the SDM, fingerprints are again captured digitally, reinforcing identity through technology that is already available and reliable.
Adding to this discomfort is the nature of the verification process itself. Purchasers and sellers are often required to present themselves repeatedly, stand in sequence, and await scrutiny in a manner that unintentionally resembles an identification parade—more commonly associated with criminal investigations. For law-abiding citizens engaged in a routine civil transaction, this experience can feel intimidating and undignified. Individuals who have voluntarily complied with all legal requirements, submitted genuine documents, paid prescribed fees, and presented themselves transparently should not be made to feel as though they are under suspicion.
Land registration is a civil and legal process, not a criminal proceeding. The intent behind verification may be legitimate, but the form and environment in which it is conducted matter greatly. A routine administrative verification should be neutral, respectful, and privacy-conscious, especially when modern biometric and digital identification systems already exist.
The burden of this system falls squarely on citizens. Senior citizens endure physical strain, daily wage earners lose income, professionals lose productive hours, and families lose time that can never be recovered. Time management is not a responsibility limited to higher authorities—it is a right of every individual.
Once fees and charges are paid well in advance for a government service, a citizen rightfully expects efficient, predictable, and user-friendly service delivery. Payment signifies compliance with rules and procedures. Endless waiting after payment undermines public confidence and defeats the purpose of organized governance. A prepaid service should not demand an entire day of uncertainty.
User-friendly service does not mean compromising legal safeguards. It means intelligent system design—where routine verifications are delegated, time slots are allotted, technology is fully utilized, and senior officers intervene only in exceptional or disputed cases.
Practical measures such as delegation of verification to trained revenue or gazetted officers, time-slot based scheduling, Aadhaar-based biometric authentication as the primary mode of identification, fixed verification hours, and transparent token systems can significantly ease both administrative pressure and public hardship.
Land registration should provide legal certainty and reassurance, not test a citizen’s patience or dignity. When hundreds of individuals spend an entire day waiting merely to establish their identity—despite carrying verified documents and having paid the requisite fees—the system must pause and reflect.
Respecting a citizen’s time and dignity is not an administrative convenience; it is the true measure of good governance.
With time many good initiatives have improved the overall situation of entire revenue department in the recent past and if the above mentioned can be accommodated it will be helpful for the common citizens residing in these islands.
Abhay Kumar
Citizen, Sri Vijaya Puram