(Land Reforms) Tenancy Reform, Tenancy Protection Acts in India, Features, Benefits, Obstacles, Limitations, Impact, Evaluation

11/3/13 Mrunal [Land Reforms] Tenancy Reform, Tenancy protection Acts in India, features, benefits, obstacles, limitations, impact,
, evaluation Print
mrunal.org/2013/11/land-reforms-tenancy-reform-tenancy-protection-acts-in-india-features-benefits-obstacles-limitations-impact-evaluation.html/print/ 1/24
[Land Reforms] Tenancy Reform, Tenancy protection Acts
in India, features, benefits, obstacles, limitations, impact,
evaluation
1. Prologue
2. Land Reform Tool #3: Tenancy Reforms
1. Element1: Landowners right to lease
2. Element2: Landowners right to Personal Cultivation
3. Element3: Tenants right against eviction & high rent
4. Element4: Tenants right to surrender
5. Element5: Tenants Right to ownership
6. Misc. rights to Tenants
3. Tenancy Reforms: Obstacles/Limitations
1. #1: Women did not benefit
2. #2: SC/ST did not benefit
3. #3: Green Revolution=land grabbing
4. #4: Personal Cultivation
4. Tenancy Reforms: Benefits
1. #1: Rise of New Politics
2. #2: Social Justice
3. #3: More investment
5. Land Reforms: Overall Negative
1. Jurisdiction
2. Outdated Land records
3. Problem in North East
4. Lack of budgetary $upport
5. Bureaucratic apathy
6. Lack of Votebank
7. Powerless Panchyat
8. Lack of Civil Society/NGO action
9. The Naxal Angle:
10. Appu
6. Land reforms: Overall Positive
7. Mock Questions
Prologue
1. Three land
How the British had difficulty learning
the land Revenue system of Desi Nawabs.
Related Searches:
Learn English
Vocabulary
Improve Your
English
Civil Service Test
Ancient World
History
Exam Preparation
Math Practice
Civil Service Exam
Free Math
Worksheets
Vocabulary Lists
Railway Recruitment
W
e
b
C
o
n
n
e
c
t

A
d
s
11/3/13 Mrunal [Land Reforms] Tenancy Reform, Tenancy protection Acts in India, features, benefits, obstacles, limitations, impact, evaluation Print
tenure system of
the British: Their
features,
implications.
So, they came up with Permanent
settlement (Zamindari), Ryotwari and
Mahalwari systems.
2. Peasant struggles
for land reforms
in British Raj:
causes and
consequences.
But the British tenure systems caused
much pain and anguish among Indian
peasants and led to numerous revolts.
3. Land reforms,
Before
independence: by
Congress
governments in
Provinces, their
benefits and
limitations.
After the Provincial elections of 1937,
Congress ministries took measures to
protect tenant farmers. But by and large
they shied away from zamindari abolition.
4. Land reforms,
After
independence:
Abolition of
Zamindari,
Reasons, Impact,
Obstacles,
Limitations.
After freedom, State Governments
enacted Zamindari Abolition Acts. As a
result erstwhile (superior) tenants
became virtual owners of their land.
=>This is First tool of Land reform.
5. Ceiling on Land
holdings:
Reasons, Impact,
Obstacles,
Limitations,
Achievements
After abolition of Zamindari, the
(superior) tenant farmers became
virtual owners of the land. They
owned tens and hundreds of acres
of land. While other peasants
owned hardly any land.
So, State governments enacted land
ceiling acts and distributed surplus
land to poors and landless. This is
second tool of Land reforms.
Now comes the third tool of land reforms:
Land Reform Tool #3: Tenancy Reforms
Various State governments have passed the laws to protect
the land owners and (superior+inferior) tenants.
Collectively these are called tenancy reform acts.
Such tenancy reform acts, usually have five elements: two
for land owners + three for tenants
but first, lets once again check the players in a tenancy
system, to get a better grip over this tenure/tenancy reform
acts:
The
State
1. enforces tenancy contracts
2. Maintains law and order.
Earns revenue for doing 1+2
Owner
The owner: the guy who owns land
They pay Revenue to the State.
Rich farmers, Zamindars etc. own
hundreds of acres of land. Cant
cultivate it on their own.
Similarly minors, disabled, widows,
soldiers, fishermen may also own land
but they cant cultivate for one reason
or another.
So these people lease their land to
other farmers (tenants).
Superior
tenants
They cultivate on land leased from the
^owner.
These are hereditary tenants. Meaning
they cultivate same land generation
after generation.
They pay rent to the owner.
They have almost the same rights as the
owners.
They can sell, mortgage or rent out the
land.
They cannot be evicted against their
will.
Other names: tenants at will,
Inferior
Tenants
subordinate tenants, temporary tenants,
subtenants.
They till the land leased from other
tenants/owners.
They pay rent to the owners/superior
tenants.
They have limited rights over the land.
They cannot sell or mortgage the land.
They can be evicted easily.
Share
croppers
Sharecroppers= cultivate other
persons land (Owner,
Superior/inferior tenant)
They get share from the produce, and
remaining goes to the tenant/owner.
The equipment and inputs items may be
provided owner/tenant
They have no rights whatsoever on the
land.
They cannot sell, rent or mortgage the
land.
Can be evicted easily.
Landless
laborers
1. They get paid in cash or kind by the
owners (or tenants)
2. Sometimes work under begari/bonded
labour.
Tenacy reform acts by and large protect only superior and inferior
tenant. Sharecroppers/Laborers get nothing. Anyways, lets check
the salient features of such Acts in various states:
Element1: Landowners right to lease
You own land, but you dont have the
time/money/mood/intention to cultivate by yourself. So you
lease it to another farmer and extract rent from him (=25-
30-40-60-75% of the produce).
This Land leasing, again leads to system of Intermediaries
(middlemen who dont cultivate) and exploitation of tenants
(farmers who actually cultivate).
Therefore, in an egalitarian/socialist/communist society:
Agri.land leasing=undesirable.
But what is the land owner is a defense personnel, widow,
minor, student or physically disabled person they cannot
cultivate land by themselves.
Hence, leasing is permitted in such exceptional categories
of land owners.
Lets check some examples
Tenancy
Reform
Act in
Provisions (may be outdated)
Andhra
Two types of leasing are practiced.
In the Andhra region: leasing is permitted
In Telengana region: large landholdings
cannot be leased, but small holdings can be
leased
Assam
Land can be leased in future
But sub-leasing forbidden. (meaning tenant cannot
lease the land further to third party)
Bihar
In Future, agri.land cannot be leased except
when owner is a person with disabilities.
Sub-leasing forbidden in any case
sub-lessee does not acquire the right of
occupancy of the land.
Gujarat
Leasing is prohibited except for Defense
personnel.
Haryana Leasing permitted.
Himachal
Agri land cannot be leased. Except when landowner
is a minor or unmarried or a widow or divorcee or
disabled or defense personnel.
Karnataka
Agri.Land cannot be leased except when landowner
is seaman or soldier.
Madhya
Pradesh
No ban on future lease, but all the past leases have
been abolished- to remove the nuisance of
Zamindar/Jagirdar in Malwa, Gwalior, Indore and
Vindhya Pradesh
Orissa Doesnt allow leasing or sub leasing of land
Rajasthan
yes, owner can lease the land to Tenant (5 years)
Tenant can further lease the land to sub-tenant (1
year)
Uttar
Pradesh
Agri. cannot be leased. Except when landowners are
widows, unmarried women, military persons,
students and disabled persons.
West
Bengal
Leasing is prohibited, but share-cropping is allowed
with some restrictions.
Element2: Landowners right to Personal
Cultivation
As we saw in Element#1: Many states permit agri.land
leasing (at least when landowner is a soldiers, widows,
minor, physically disabled).
But what if landowner himself wants resume cultivation later
on? e.g. soldier comes back to village after retirement, or
the minor student becomes an adult, or the widow gets
remarried.
Therefore laws permit the landowner to takeback the land
from the tenant, IF he (landowner) wants to resume personal
cultivation. lets check:
State Law
Can Landowner take
back land from Tenant,
for personal
cultivation?
Andhra
Yes but not more than
75% of the leased land.
Bihar
50% of landholding or
5 acre, whichever is
less
Bengal
50% of landholding or
2.5 acre, whichever is
less
Kerala, Orissa, Gujarat, Himachal
Pradesh, Maharashtra, Karnataka
and Tamil Nadu, Manipur, Tripura
Yes but not more than
50% of the leased land.
Uttar Pradesh
No, landowners cannot
take back land for
personal cultivation
So far we saw two elements that protect the rights of landowner
viz (1) right to lease and (2) right to personal cultivation. Now
lets check the rights of tenants.
Element3: Tenants right against eviction & high
rent
If landowner can evict the tenant according to his whims-
fancies=>this system leads to exploitation.
Hence there should be fixed term and fixed rent.
Meaning as long as the teant is within that xyz years lease
limit and keeps paying that xyz amount of rent, you
(landowner) cannot evict him.
Tenure security
Insecurity of tenure is a big hurdle in the improvement of
agriculture. Tenant pays little attention to the soil
improvement, digging of well or tube-well and construction
of embankment etc. This negatively affects agro
productivity.
Security of tenure is must for social justice as well.
Hence, Most state made laws to provide at least 5 years
tenure security.
(meaning once you lease your agri-land, you cannot take it
back within 5 years- except for personal cultivation as we
saw in element #2. but even there, you can only take back
~50% of land for personal cultivation.) Anyways, lets
check with examples:
Assam
Landowner cannot evacuate tenant, IF that tenant
has been tilling the land for 3 years or more.
Manipur
A tenant could not be removed from a minimum
area of 1.2 acres of the land, until he is given an
alternative land.
Orissa
tenants who is lawfully cultivating any land cannot
be removed.
Fixed tenure for half of the area held by Tenant
Rajasthan
yes, to both tenants and sub-tenants are given
term security: (5 years and 1 year
respectively)
But tenant can be removed from the land if he
fails to pay rent for two years or more OR if
he transfers holdings to third party without
permission OR damages the land.
Tamilnadu
Landowner cannot evict the tenant except
1. If he wants to resume personal cultivation.
2. tenant is not paying rent
West
Bengal
tenant and Sharecroppers (bargadars) cannot be
evicted, except
They stop cultivating land.
They lease the same land to third party.
They refuse to give share/rent to the owner
Rent Security
During British Raj, there was no law to protect farmers
against high rents. The Zamindar/ landowner used to
determine rent according to their discretion. Often, rent
would be ~50-70% of the total produce.
Result? Tenant farmer has hardly any surplus income
left=>cant buy hybrid seeds, fertilizers, pesticides,
machinery, in short he cannot invest in agri.improvement.
Therefore, after freedom, most state government passed
laws to fix maximum rent in the range of 25-33% of the
produce.
state
maximum rent that an
owner can charge from
tenant
Punjab, Haryana, Tamil Nadu and
Andhra Pradesh (coastal areas)
33-40% of the gross
agri.produce
remaining states 20-25%
Additionally, if a tenant cannot pay rent on time, the landlord
cannot approach court to get his cattle, farm-tools and standing
crops. (In other words, tenant given protection against attachment
even if he defaults on rent payment.)
Limitation: Although states had fixed Maximum rent in 20-50%
range, but in most cases, the tenants had to pay rent in the range of
50-70%- especially in the areas with high productivity under green
revolution. Corrupt District officials failed to enforce the rent
limits.
6
th
Five year plan suggested the state governments to pass laws to
bring down rents to ensure rents are not above 33% of the
produce.
Operation Barga
by Leftist government in West Bengal
In the late 70s. Provided following
registration of Sharecroppers (known as Bargadar)
Fixed rent: 25% of the produce. Meaning landowner
(Jotedar) can only get 25% or 1/4
th
of the produce. While
Sharecropper (Bargadar) gets 75% or 3/4
th
of the produce.
gave security of tenure: permanent and heritable
Element4: Tenants right to surrender
Ok so far, tenant is given term-security (you cannot evict
him before xyz years) and rent security (you cannot charge
beyond xyz% of the produce).
But what if tenant himself wants to stop farming on that land.
For example,
a. he bought his own land at a different place, or
b. his son gets a decent job in the city and asks him to
relocate or
c. He joins politics and becomes a telecom/coal minister
to mint truckload of cash.
Therefore, most state laws also allow the tenant to
voluntarily surrender the land back to the original owner.
Challenge: Sometimes landowner might use
bullying/coercion/gun-power to make tenant sign
stamppapers declaring his surrender.
Solution: Some states also have verification procedure.
e.g. in Andhra, after Tenant surrenders the land to owner, the
Tehsildar will verify whether surrender was genuine or not.
But then again- thinking in Bollywood terms: evil
Landowner might kidnap Tenants family and order him not
to complaint to Tehsildar.
4
th
Five year plan recommended: the Land Voluntarily
surrendered by a tenant =>should goto state government and
then state government should allot it to eligible poors. But
very few states implemented this recommendation
So far weve learned
1. Owners right to lease
2. Owners right to personal cultivation
3. tenants right against eviction
4. tenants right to surrender
Now to the fifth and final element under Land Tenancy reform
acts:
Element5: Tenants Right to ownership
Many state laws permit tenant to acquire the land IF he pays 10-
20-50times the annual rent to the landowner. Lets check:
States that permitted tenants
to acquire land after paying
money to original landlord
Bombay (now
Mahrashtra+Gujarat), Uttar
Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh,
Hyderabad, Mysore and Delhi
States that permitted tenants
to acquire land without
paying money to original
landlord
Assam, West Bengal, Bihar,
Orissa, Bhopal and Vindhya
Pradesh
States reduced rent of the
tenants without giving them
ownership rights
Andhra, Madras, Rajasthan,
Saurashtra, Madhya Bharat,
Hyderabad (jagir areas) and
Ajmer
Lets check some specific provisions of Tenants right to
acquire/purchase land
Andhra
Tenant can buy after paying 8 times the annual
rent.
Bihar
If Tenant cultivated the land continuously
for 12 years, can acquire right of
occupancy from the landowners
without paying money to original
landlord.
Limitation: Many small farmers had been
tilling land on oral agreements, did not
have paper records to prove 12 years.
Gujarat
Tenant has right to buy land, if he had been tilling
continuously for 1 year. But he has to pay to
owner. In 1975, Gujarat ~0.8 out of 1.3 million
tenants got ownership rights after paying to their
respective land owners. (=more than 50% of
tenants benefit)
Madhya
Pradesh
Yes, if tenant pays 15 times the annual rent to
the owner.
Maharashtra
Tenant has right to purchase land within
one year of the commencement of
tenancy.
in 1975, ~1.1 out of ~2.6 million tenants
acquired ownership rights. (=less than
50%)
Challenge: Many tenants could not afford
the large sum of money to purchase the
land.
Manipur
yes, if tenant pays 30 times the annual rent to
owner
Orissa
Yes, if tenant pays 10 times the annual rent to
the owner.
Government Abolished intermediaries but did
Tamilnadu not facilitate tenants to purchase land from the
landlord.
Limitation of Right to ownership:
In above examples, we saw how ~50% of tenants in Gujarat and
Maharahstra, got ownership rights after paying to landowner. But
why didnt every tenant bought land from his land owner? Because:
1. State laws already gave rent reduction + permanent
occupancy rights= these superior tenants were for all
practical purposes virtual owners.
2. Hence there was hardly any motivation to try and acquire full
ownership.
3. Besides to get full ownership=> need capital (money) and
legal complications.
Misc. rights to Tenants
Some states also made laws for:
1. Compensation for tenant, if he made permanent
improvements to the land such as, digging of well, planting
of trees, construction of farm house, embankment, etc.
2. During natural disaster/flood/drought etc. if government
remits land-revenue to the landlord, the latter too will have
to remit rent to the cultivator.
3. Landlord cannot receive gift from the tenant and cannot ask
tenant to provide him free services. (In other words, Begari
removed, Art.23)
Tenancy Reforms: Obstacles/Limitations
1. Land reform delayed, is land reform denied: The
inordinate delays in law making=>Landowners evicted
potential beneficiaries (tenants) before the law came into
force.
2. Underground: These laws pushed tenancy to underground =
in concealed form, through oral agreements without
anything on paper. The tenants were now called farm
servants though they continued to work in exactly the same
status.
3. Oral: Most tenancy agreements were oral and informal,
hence tenants could not prove anything in court to assert
their rights.
4. Creamy Layer: Didnt provide security to tenure to all
tenants. Only the upper stratum of the farmers who had the
knowledge and means to fight court cases, benefited from
these laws.
5. Sharecroppers did not benefit: In many state laws,
Sharecroppers dont enjoy same rights as a tenant.
Therefore, landowners converted tenants into sharecroppers.
#1: Women did not benefit
Women in India have traditionally been deprived of property
rights and their property rights still meet with strong social
opposition.
During the heydays of land redistribution (60-80s) males
were given the patta (document showing ownership right
over land). But their wives got nothing.
Result? Women have been working in farmland without any
title/paper documents. It leads to following negative consequences
1. Women cannot get loan/credit, subsidy on irrigation-
fertilizer-seeds etc.
2. Women become destitute in case of desertion, divorce, or
widowhood. In North India, widows often found working as
agricultural laborers on the farms of their well-off brothers
or brothers-in-law.
3. Women have no bargaining power
@household decision making
@labour market for wages.
This is new form of Zamindari exploitation because farm
operation (by female) is divorced from farm ownership (by
female). Thus, tenancy reforms/land reforms have failed to bring
gender equity in rural areas.
#2: SC/ST did not benefit
Recall the hierarchy of players in a tenancy system:
landowner=>superior tenant =>inferior
tenant=>sharecropper=>landless laborers.
Major beneficiaries of land reform laws = superior tenant,
who mostly fall in OBC category.
But impact of land reform measures on Scheduled Castes
and Scheduled Tribes were not significant.
Landowners- large, medium, small or marginal- all
vehemently resisters tenancy reforms. No political party
could dare to lose their vote bank. Hence Tenancy reforms
didnt trickle down.
The rural strata at the bottom of land-ownership and caste
hierarchy, continued to be exploited by the old and new
elite.
In other words, tenancy reforms merely replaced the old elite
(upper caste) with new elite (Backward castes). But have not
trickled down below that.
#3: Green Revolution=land grabbing
The Green Revolution made agriculture profitable, thus led
to role reversal among tenancy players.
Before=: big farmers would lease land to small farmers.
After=: big farmers would take land from small/marginal
farmers on lease, and theyll cultivate with hybrid seeds,
machines, fertilizers etc. (doubt: but why would small
farmer lease his land? Because he lacks the capital to buy
all those hybrid seeds n fertilizer- hence for a small farmer,
it is less risky and more profitable to lease land to big
farmer).
But, eventually many of these big (tenant) farmers grabbed
the land using loopholes in tenancy laws.
In other words, rich farmers using big capital and modern
technology, have converted agriculture into a capitalist
mode of production. In such cases tenancy laws have harmed
the small and marginal farmers => Green revolution has
been detrimental to land reforms.
#4: Personal Cultivation
Most State Acts allow landowners to takeback land from
tenant for personal cultivation.
On paper the term personal cultivation looked reasonable,
but when applied in the field, was confusing and subject to
multiple interpretations.
Does personal cultivation mean he himself has to plough the
field? or can he hire a landless labourer for ploughing and
irrigation? .. Concept was vaguely defined, there were no
definite answers in the various state laws.
Thus, ex-zamindars/landowners evicted the tenants from the
land claiming that they (owner) intended to cultivate the land
personally. In Punjab alone, more than 500,000 tenants
were evicted in pretext of Personal cultivation.
Some more negative points stem from bureaucratic apathy
(explained in later part of this article). Anyways, enough of
negativity, lets check some positive points:
Tenancy Reforms: Benefits
#1: Rise of New Politics
After freedom but before land
reforms (50-60s)
After land reforms (60-70-
80s)
The political process
dominated by the client
patron model.
In this model, the rural elite
(upper caste) would
persuade or force the lower
caste villagers to vote for
their (upper caste) leader.
Hence political parties
mainly focused on pleasing
those rural elite. And did
not care much for
SC/ST/OBC
Paved the way for the
rise of new political
forces in the country.
Particularly Superior
Tenants / Bullock
Capitalists / middle
Shudra castes
(=Yadav, Jat and
Ahir)
Tenancy
reforms+Green
revolution= gave them
money power and
freedom to assert
themselves politically.
First they became a
pressure group, later a
political group
No government could
afford to ignore their
demands for
subsidized electricity,
fertilizer, irrigation
etc.
Thus we can say,
1. Land reforms helped new classes/castes to gain political
power directly/indirectly.
2. The participation of the backward classes deepened Indian
democracy.
3. Indian democracy became more inclusive.
4. Political system became more competitive and complex.
#2: Social Justice
Before land reforms after
Upper castes owned most of
the land In Village.
While the lower castes lived
as tenants and agriculture
labourers.
This Landlessness and
insecure tenancies forced the
majority of the rural
population to be dependent
on the upper caste=>often
lead to exploitation.
These laws gave the
lower castes the
security of tenure
over farmland
+land
ceiling+zamindari
abolition+
Panchayati Raj
reforms.
Result:
Influence/domination
of upper caste
declined in village
power structure
Thus, Constitutions
promise of giving
justice social,
political and
economic, became a
reality.
#3: More investment
In the ryotwari areas of Bombay state (MH+Guj), ~50% of
the tenants became landowners- including inferior tenants.
Even in former zamindari areas such as West Bengal, nearly
half the sharecroppers got occupancy rights under Operation
Barga.
Now the tenants and sharecroppers who got occupancy
rights=> they had the motivation of becoming progressive
farmers, use high yielding variety, invest more capital etc.
So far, we learned three major land reforms measures in post
independent India
1. Zamindari abolition
2. land ceiling
3. tenure reforms
Lets check their overall impact: negative+positive.
Land Reforms: Overall Negative
Jurisdiction
Land is a State subject under the Constitution=> different
States have evolved differently in the field of land
management.
The Union can play only a limited role to play in this regard.
At most they can frame policy, release funds but
implementation rests in the hands of State Government.
Some states have moved quickly by passing necessary
legislations, while other states have adopted a slower and
piecemeal approach in this regard.
Consequently there are considerable variations in the results
achieved by different states.
Even in the same state- different regions show different rate
of progress.
UN report says: In India there seems to be great inequality in
different states regarding the land reforms.these land reforms
are not implemented in the true spirit.
Outdated Land records
In Ryotwari areas (Bombay State, Madras State and Assam)
Before independence, the government directly collected
land revenue from farmer. So, district officials kept up to
date land records for purpose of assessment and collection
of land Revenue.
Village Accountant (VA) had to update the entries every
year.
The superiors in the hierarchy closely supervised the work
of the VA.
The records showed who owned the different plots of land in
the village, the area and boundaries of each plot, who
cultivated it, what crops were grown and how much was
payable to the government as land revenue.
But after independence, this system fell into disarray.
Permanent settlement areas & Princely states: There was no
practice of the annual updating of records.
But after independence, state government did not pay attention to
land records.
Gradually In most States, villages and field maps, records of
rights and land measurement records have become obsolete.
Tenancy reforms can only be implemented if there is proper
written records of tenancies and land ownership. This was
not always available because most of the time land leased on
oral agreement- nothing on paper.
Outdated land records = land disputes, land grabbing, court cases,
landowners evade ceilings=> Land reform remains #EPICFAIL
Problem in North East
The system of land records and land administration are
entirely different in the hilly and tribal tracts of north-
eastern States.
In some of these areas, there was no legislation regarding
land and land related matters.
Therefore, accurate land records do not exist.
Jhuming or shifting cultivation is practiced. There is no
record of the area or the boundaries of plots allotted to
individuals. (+ the nuisance of illegal Bangladeshi Migrant
farmers)
Lack of budgetary $upport
Cost of collecting land revenue (paperwork, staff-salary,
electricity etc.)= higher than the actual cash received under
land revenue. Therefore, many states dont even bother
collecting land Revenue.
Land revenue administration falls under non-plan
expenditure = doesnt get much budgetary allocation.
As a result, administration suffers because department wont
hire many officers/employees, wont bother building new
offices, buying new photocopiers, GPS survey devices,
jeeps etc.
In many places, Village accountants dont have a separate
office. Lack of photocopiers, computers= land records not
maintained properly.
Many Tahsildars didnt have telephones* and jeeps. So they
were out of touch from day-to-day bribery and
mismanagement by patwari @village level. (*we are talking
about 50-90s era, when India had more toilets than mobile
phones)
Result? Land records are outdated => land disputes, land
grabbing and frequent litigations in courts. Poor people
suffer.
Bureaucratic apathy
officers live
in cities
Today, many patwaris, village officers,
Mandal officers, revenue inspectors etc.
have settled in small towns/cities with
their families. They sign files from home,
run office through phone and rarely visit
the villages.
They write inquire reports without doing
spot inspections in village.
Villagers have to visit town to get their
problem resolved=costly affair.
Land mafia and rich farmers get things
done by paying bribes.
WB: In West Bengal there are no Village
Accountants. The Circle Inspector is the
functionary of the Land Administration
Department at the lowest level. People
have to go to his office for various
purposes.
bogus
training
Revenue officers are trained better in
court procedures than in dispute-
resolution in a humane manner.
Hence they give more emphasis on form
rather than content, on letter rather than
spirit.
They rely on documents, stamp papers,
affidavits but dont bother to make field
visit, talk with people to find the ground
reality.
Changed
focus
Today, District officers (namely DM & SDM)
mainly focused on
Conversion of Agri-land into industrial
land
SEZ/industrialization related matter
law and order maintenance
How to chow down money from
MNREGA, IAY etc. (or prevent it)
Hence, land reform programs=low priority for
senior officers @District level. They tend to
ignore the Tehsildar/Patwaris
inefficiency/corruption.
Tarikh pe
Tarik
Because of above reasons: a villager cannot get
problem solved through village/tehsil level
officer. He has to approach the court. But
1. Majority of revenue courts continue to
function in English language, but villagers
dont know English.
2. Revenue Courts already choked with
thousands of cases related to land. Poor
litigant cannot afford making trips and
hiring lawyers
Result? In most cases poor litigant will
compromise with the land mafia/rich farmer/ex-
zamindar or just stop pursuing the matter.
no
coordination
Many state departments keep their own land-
database e.g. Agriculture, drinking water,
irrigation, animal husbandry, forest etc. But
there is no linkage amongst these different data
base.
In short, land reform= low priority for state government. All the
new initiatives (Computerization of records, Forest rights Act
have come from Union.)
Lack of Votebank
(From 50-90s)
Target audience for land reforms= tenants, landless
agricultural labourers, SC/ST. But they were largely
unorganized (Except WB and Kerala). They were unable to
bring required pressure on the government for speedy
implementation of the land reforms.
For political workers at grassroots are indifferent to land
reforms because it was easy to sway the ignorant voters on
desired political line according to religion and caste. The
Ignorance, poverty, illiteracy and inegalitarian system has
favoured such petty politics.
Therefore land reform was more of a rhetoric rather than
real agenda of governments.
Powerless Panchyat
Panchayats dont have sufficient revenue sources of their
own.
Money flow: Centrally sponsored schemes (named after you
know who)=>DRDA+Line deparments @State
government=>Panchayat.
Result? Panchayats are too weak to do anything about land
reforms. + The proxy influence of rural elites stonewall any
land reform initiatives.
Lack of Civil Society/NGO action
In the noteworthy movements by civil society/NGO for land
reforms= Bhoodan/Gramdan, land satyagraha etc. But all these
things happened before 90s. Today civil society/NGOs very vocal
about transparency, anti-corruption, anti-rape laws, nuclear
projects, mining rights etc. but land reforms hardly get any
attention. Why?
1. It is easy to get national-international awards/funding,
media-recognition, political attention in these new topics.
2. Just like secularism, the land distribution also has lost
its original meaning. So, if an NGO talks too much about
land redistribution- he might be labelled as naxal-
sympethizer.
3. In land reform sector: (1) computerization of land
records=done by district administration and (2) for forest
rights act=>done through gram Sabha. So Jholachhap NGOs
dont see opportunities for getting government
projects/funds to mint ca$h, unlike in the schemes for under
HIV/child-labour/education/SHG type activities.
The Naxal Angle:
The present Left wing extremism (LWE) has roots at two places:
West Bengal (1967) @Naxalbari
Andhra (1949) @Telengana and @Srikakulam.
At that time, main cause of these movement = exploitation by
zamindar/landlords/forest contractors. But In the heydays of naxal
movement, focus of the state governments shifted from
agrarian/land reforms to law and order preservation. As a result:
1. Many villagers remained landless.
2. Rise of upper caste militia/private armies like Ranvir Sena,
Kunwar Sena etc.
3. Within village, Lack of growth in non-agricultural sector.
4. Tribal land alienation by mining mafia.
All these factors further helped the Maoists to recruit more
cadres from villages. District officials dont goto Maoist affected
areas, look @all villagers with suspicion etc.etc.etc. Ultimately,
land reform cannot be carried out.
Thus, Left wing extremism (LWE) and Lack of Land Reform
(LLR) have formed a vicious cycle.
Appu
Task Force on Agrarian Relations set up by the Planning
Commission headed by P. S. Appu. (1972 )Made following
observations
1. Lack of political will=no tangible progress
2. The decentralization of power to the rural sector was seen
by the politicians as a threat to their national prominence.
3. The erstwhile superior tenants belonging mostly to the upper
and middle castes have benefittd.
4. (but) A majority of the agricultural laborers =politically
unorganized=could not benefit from the land reform
measures.
5. Land reform Acts were poorly drafting= many loopholes and
litigations.
6. Land records were outdated, most states didnot bother
updating.
7. Five year plans only gave lip service for land reforms but
didnt allot significant funds.
8. Land reform has practically disappeared from the agenda of
most political parties. but This is an inevitable consequence
of the far reaching changes that have taken place in social
and economic fields;
Land reforms: Overall Positive
1. abolished exploitative the land tenure systems prevalent in
agrarian society
2. Distributed the surplus land among the landless and the
weaker sections of the society.
3. Provided security of tenure i.e. the tenants are assured that
they can cultivate the land for long time period.
4. In some cases tenants even given ownership rights.
5. fixed rent in the range of 25-33%
6. Without use of violence.
7. The cumulative effect of abolition of zamindari, tenancy
legislation and ceiling legislation= motivated the cultivators
to invest and improve agricultural practices.
8. Even though these land reforms were met with limited
success, they made a significant positive impact on poverty
removal.
9. Land reforms+ Sanskritization + democratization +
Panchayati Raj= lower castes have become more organized
and assertive about their rights.
10. In areas where land reform has not been implemented, the
inequalities have persisted, caste oppression is most acute
and have generally experienced low socio-economic
development. (In other words where Land reforms were
properly implemented- inequality is less, caste oppression
is less and socio-economic Development is better).
11. Historically unique effort at transformation of agrarian
relations within a democratic framework.
12. Brought fundamental changes in the agrarian economy, rural
social structure, and rural power structure. Moved India
society towards the egalitarian society.
13. Increased democratization of Indian polity and reduction in
influence of the dominant sections of the society. Counter-
argument: Impact was not so significant like China/USSR.
To sum up, Land reforms are a major instruments of social
transformation in a backward economy based on feudal and semi-
feudal productive relationships. But in India, they met with limited
success mainly because of the political and bureaucratic apathy.
Mock Questions
12/15 marks
1. Analyze the role of tenancy reform laws as a measure of
land reforms.
2. Write a note on the measures taken by states to provide
security of tenure to farmers.
3. Land reforms in early decades after independence, have
failed to bring gender equity in rural power structure.
Elaborate.
4. Critically examine the Green revolution as a reason for non-
inclusive growth in rural India.
5. The blame for partial success of land reforms squarely falls
on the local bureaucracy. Comment.
6. Only the upper stratum of the peasants have benefited from
the land reforms. For the Landless, land reform remains an
unfinished business.
7. Evaluate the impact of Land reforms measures by the state
governments in the early decades after independence.
8. Discuss, in brief, the contributions of land reforms in rural
development.
9. Critically examine the impact of land reforms on Indian
economy and society.
10. Critically examine the impact of social, economic and
political power structure on land reforms in rural India.
URL to article: http://mrunal.org/2013/11/land-reforms-tenancy-
reform-tenancy-protection-acts-in-india-features-benefits-
obstacles-limitations-impact-evaluation.html
Posted By Mrunal On 02/11/2013 @ 12:18 In the category polity

(Land Reforms) Tenancy Reform, Tenancy Protection Acts in India, Features, Benefits, Obstacles, Limitations, Impact, Evaluation

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

(Land Reforms) Tenancy Reform, Tenancy Protection Acts in India, Features, Benefits, Obstacles, Limitations, Impact, Evaluation

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

11/3/13 Mrunal [Land Reforms] Tenancy Reform, Tenancy protection Acts in India, features, benefits, obstacles, limitations, impact,

You might also like