Recently, a Private Member’s Bill to amend the Jammu and Kashmir Land Grants Act was introduced to the Jammu and Kashmir Assembly for the first time since the NC established its rule over Jammu and Kashmir. The NC’s decision to permit the introduction of this bill marks an important, but procedural, break from its past opposition to these types of bills in the Jammu and Kashmir Assembly at the introduction stage. However, the underlying issues raised by the introduction of this bill cut to the core of governance, equity and the public mandate itself.
The introduction of this bill was led by the NC’s Tanvir Sadiq in an effort to restore the provisions of the Land Grants Act of 1960 and thereby overturn the 2022 Rules that provide for the sale of expiring leases, primarily commercial leases, at prevailing market value. While the Chief Minister, Omar Abdullah, who also holds the Revenue portfolio, did not oppose the introduction of this bill and framed his non-opposition as a simple matter of legislative procedure, the political and social implications of this decision are very much at the forefront of this issue.
The Bill at first glance deals with a real problem – the (majority) end of (most of) the Hotels Lease, or leases of the hotels used by the many travellers who come to book their lodging and food in Gulmarg. Whether the govt of Jammu and Kashmir should implement measures for clear, continuing leases is a legitimate matter of policy. However, the timing and manner of this bill have raised serious questions about whose interests are being served…
Sunil Sharma, the Leader of the Opposition charged that the NC is acting “not for public good,” but “to protect the elite interests” of those who own or operate hotels in the Gulmarg area. This sentiment is shared by a strong public perception that the land of this area has been for the benefit of the wealthy and different powerful factions. His direct reference to “Nedous” as being an elite hotel and “The CM’s personal property” are just two examples of how political charges are often based on insecurity that the elite are better able to access the corridors of power than the average citizen.
The question creates a basic contradiction. The government’s willingness to back this proposed law at the introductory level shows that they are ready to deal with commercial landlords’ problems, but still refuse to deal with those who have been living in constant fear of being evicted from little pieces of government-owned land for many years. If rents are being extended for hoteliers in Gulmarg with little delay, why isn’t the government doing something for the regular families who have lived on small pieces of government-owned land for generations?
Now that the bill has been introduced, Chief Minister Omar Abdullah has a crucial test as a leader. Because the Bill has been permitted to be introduced, it must be changed into an outcome of the broader commitment of this government to social justice. The umbrella of this government is the promise of equitable development and being held accountable to that commitment is a part of the mandate of this government. If the Government of Jammu & Kashmir, through the provisions of the first significant piece of legislation regarding land policy enacted during this term, is perceived to merely rescue the elite, this cannot be viewed as being beneficial for the diverse base of this state.
Transparency must be demanded by the Assembly. What is the definition of all government land that is being leased according to the inquiry set forth? How much has been charged for each of these leases? What are the names of the individuals who have benefited from these leased lands? These are not unimportant questions; they represent the foundation on which public accountability lies.
