NC backtracks on assurances to PDP
Irfan Tramboo
SRINAGAR, Oct 28: The ruling National Conference (NC) and the main opposition party, the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) today joined hands in the Legislative Assembly and voted against a bill that sought land rights to local residents occupying public land across Jammu and Kashmir.
Follow the Daily Excelsior channel on WhatsApp
The “Jammu & Kashmir Regularisation and Recognition of Property Rights of Residents in Public Land Bill, 2025,” introduced by PDP MLA Waheed ur Rehman Para in the Legislative Assembly, aimed to legalize ownership for thousands of families who have lived on such land for decades.
After Parra introduced the bill, Chief Minister Omar Abdullah said the proposal sought to confer ownership rights on those who had illegally occupied state land.
“How is this possible, and how can we allow it?” Omar asked. “Under this bill, it appears that tomorrow anyone can find a piece of land, build a house on it, and get it transferred in their name. We cannot allow this.”
He said the bill proposed measures “beyond even the Roshni scheme,” stressing that the Government could not permit such a move. “On the face of it, it may look simple-someone has built a house on Government land, let them own it. But it’s not that easy,” he said.
It may be recalled that the PDP had extended support to the National Conference (NC) in the Rajya Sabha elections on the condition that two of its bills-one on land rights and another on the regularization of daily wagers-would be passed. Both these bills, however, were rejected by the Government
Abdullah, in his reply, recalled that during Dr Farooq Abdullah’s tenure, a plan was framed under the Roshni Act to convert leasehold rights into freehold rights, with the revenue to be used for electricity generation.
“Later, when Ghulam Nabi Azad was Chief Minister, he removed the time cap and allowed all leasehold rights to be converted. That led to politics, and when it was challenged in court, we couldn’t defend the scheme even for those who had rightful possession,” he said.
The Chief Minister added that those without land were already covered under the Pradhan Mantri Awas Yojana (PMAY) for housing.
“But from the Government’s side, it will not happen that those who have occupied land illegally and built houses will be given ownership. We cannot accept this bill, and I urge the member to withdraw it,” he said.
In response, Parra accused Omar of “forgetting his own legacy” and reminded him of the land reforms undertaken by Sheikh Muhammad Abdullah.
“You seem to have forgotten that you are the son of Sher-e-Kashmir, who implemented the land-to-the-tiller reforms,” Parra said, alleging that Omar was acting out of “fear of the BJP.”
After August 5, 2019, Parra said, the issue of land had taken center stage.
“Under PMAY, land is being given to the landless and houses to the homeless. But those who already have houses and land-will they now be thrown out? If you can give land to the landless and houses to the homeless, you cannot take away the shelter of people who are domiciles living on their land.”
He urged the Chief Minister to allow the bill for discussion instead of rejecting it outright.
“This is everyone’s issue and part of Sheikh Abdullah’s legacy. If you withdraw from this, you are withdrawing from your own politics, promises, and policies. Don’t reject it under BJP’s pressure. Accept it for discussion, and if there are flaws, we can fix them,” he said.
When Omar asked Parra to withdraw the bill and said the Government would not allow it, Parra refused. “This is an important issue. I will not withdraw it,” he said.
The Speaker then sought to put the bill to vote, but the Chief Minister intervened, saying, “Don’t give him the last word; the Government has the last word.”
The Chief Minister said the PDP could not claim the National Conference’s legacy and asserted that there was a clear difference between Parra’s proposal and the land reforms carried out by Sheikh Abdullah.
“What Sher-e-Kashmir did, we know better. Land-to-the-tiller was meant to give land to farmers. What you are proposing is completely different,” he said.
He added that even his own relatives had faced issues with leasehold violations.
“Right is right, and wrong is wrong. Don’t bring religion, region, or politics into it at the cost of justice,” he said.
The rejected bill sought to provide special provisions for residents of the Union Territory of Jammu and Kashmir by recognizing ownership rights over state, Kacharai, common, and Shamilat land for those in possession of such land.
It aimed to secure ownership or transfer rights in favor of such residential occupants in the interest of the “right to shelter” guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India.
Follow our WhatsApp channel
