Introduction
Since India had been ruled by several rulers from different parts of the world, that’s why its land policies kept changing. The primary focus of all rulers was to earn more money by the exploitation of farmers and therefore, they kept changing the land policies and its distribution according to their needs. By the time British left India, a lot of damages was already done to our economy and society. One such damage was the distribution of land to a few hands by introducing the Zamindari System. Possession of major area of lands was in few powerful hands only. This uneven distribution of land led to the exploitation of farmers and also a hindrance to the economic development of the country.
Agrarian Reforms was done in order to undo all the damages done to the agricultural resources. It aimed to reallocate the lands and distribute them equally. Land reforms are an attempt by the government to achieve social and economic equality and to utilize the land to its full capacity.
Historical Background
Ancient India depicts a complex set of land relations involving private ownership, royal administration, and communal rule of villages. Private ownership finds it’s justification in the writings of Manu according to which land belongs to the person who clears it. This was the age of abundance and free possession. Individuals were owners of the lands and the rights of rulers were restricted to the collection of taxes. However, with the rise of the Mauryanempire, it was believed that all the lands belonged to King but any individual was not deprived of their land as long as they paid taxes. But, whenever they faltered in paying taxes, King used his ultimate power and seized the land.
However, with the arrival of the medieval period, private ownership saw its decline. This period had considerable influence on the evolution of intermediaries. This was the period when the concept of zamindars came into existence who used to collect revenue for the emperor. But it was the British who organized the Zamindari system in a well-mannered way. They realised it very early that agriculture and land are the key factors in the development of the Indian economy and they must fully control it in order to stabilise their rule over Indian territory. In British India, there were three major land tenure systems:
- Zamindari System
- Ryotwari System
- Mahalwari system
Zamindari System: East India Company introduced the Zamindari System through the Permanent Settlement Act in 1793 with a view to earning more revenue. It was mainly introduced in Bengal, Bihar, Orissa and some parts of Uttar Pradesh. Zamindars were to act as intermediaries between the farmers and the company. They were to collect revenue from the farmers for the Company.
Ryotwari System: This tenure system was not as much prevalent as Zamindari System. Here, there were no intermediaries between the cultivators and the state. Farmers had to pay the revenue directly to the state. The individual cultivator was called Ryot and he had full rights on land regarding the sale, transfer, and leasing. He could not be evicted from the land as long as they pay taxes.
Mahalwari System: It was introduced by Lord William Bentinck in Agra and Awadh. Under this system, the whole village was treated as one unit as far as revenue collection is concerned and the village headmen were given the responsibility of collecting the land revenue.
Reforms after Independence
At the time of Indian independence, the majority of the lands were concentrated in the hands of few landlords and intermediaries who were exploiting the cultivators or landless. So, to eliminate all these drawbacks, the Indian National Congress set up an agrarian reforms committee under the chairmanship of J.C. Kumarappa after independence. The committee recommended the abolition intermediaries and fixation of ceilings on land holdings among other things. The recommendations of the committee had a substantial impact on the agrarian reforms post-independence.
Abolition of intermediaries: The abolition of intermediaries like zamindars and Jagirdars was one of the primary objectives of the agrarian reforms so as to bring the farmers under direct contact with the state. On the recommendation of agrarian reforms committee, all the states in India enacted laws to abolish the intermediaries and zamindars in the 1950s although the impact varied from state to state. The first-ever act was passed in Madras in 1948. An estimated 2 crore tenants are said to have come in direct contact with the state making them owners of lands.
Tenancy Reform: The agrarian reforms committee strongly felt the need to provide security and protection to tenants. This viewpoint was further supported by various five-year plans. Subsequently, amendments were made in the tenancy laws and states implemented legislation to protect them from eviction and grant them permanent rights on lands. They could be evicted from their lands only in accordance with the laws. The tenants should not be made landless in any case. Following measures were implemented under tenancy reforms:
- Regulation of Rent: In the pre-independence period, the British were only interested in earning maximum profits and therefore they gave immense powers to zamindars and as a result, zamindars charged extremely high rents from tenants which were not in proportion to the agricultural production. Fifty per cent of the total produce was paid as rent. Therefore, to curb these evil practices and regulate the rents, several laws were enacted. According to the first five-year plan, rent should not be more than 20 to 25 per cent.
- Security of tenure: There was a content fear of eviction in tenants. So, to protect them from eviction and grant them permanent rights over lands, several laws have been passed in most of the states. They have been declared the owners of the lands they cultivate in exchange of compensation to the owners.
Ceilings on Land Holdings: The term ‘ ceiling on land holdings’ refers to the maximum limit exceeding which no individual or farmer can hold any land. Due to the unjust policies of the British, few individuals possessed most of the lands and thereby leaving small farmers, peasants and workers landless. This was not only a hindrance in economic development but also very unjust. Therefore, the main objective of this reform is to redistribute the surplus land to the landless and give them new social status and bring them social equality. In INC’s Nagpur session in 1959, it was resolved that restrictions must be put on the size of land holdings an individual can hold. After this resolution, most of the states imposed ceilings on land holdings except those in the northeastern region. It must be noted that West Bengal and Jammu and Kashmir had already implemented these reforms in the early 1950s along with the abolition of intermediaries.
Consolidation of Holdings: This term simply means bringing together several small plots of lands of a farmer scattered at different places either by purchase or exchange of lands. So far, only one-third of the cultivated lands have been consolidated as there as there are various obstacles in consolidation such as variations in the quality of land, poor response from farmers and complicated process of consolidation among others. Only 15 states have passed consolidation laws so far.
Cooperative Farming: There is an abundance of small farmers in India who possess very little farmland and therefore it becomes unprofitable for them to do farming. Therefore, for such farmers, cooperative farming reform was implemented. In this farming, small farmers having petty lands come together and pool their lands for the purpose of cultivation. It was recommended by the agrarian reforms committee. It received attention in the second five-year plan, “the main task is to take such essential steps as will provide sound foundations for the development of cooperative farming so that over a period of 10 years or so, a substantial proportion of agricultural land is cultivated on the cooperative lines.”
Legal Perspective
The above reform measures were adopted and implemented by the states regarding the agrarian reforms in India. Although we have discussed them, we also need to discuss some of the legal provisions and constitutional amendments regarding the agrarian reforms:
The First Amendment: After the independence and enactment of the constitution of India, most of the state governments started making laws as zamindari abolition acts for agrarian reforms in the country. These acts were challenged in various high courts and even Bihar Land Reforms Act was declared unconstitutional by Patna High Court on the ground that it violated Article 14 of the Constitution. Therefore, with a view to safeguard land reforms act, the first Constitutional amendment was made. It became necessary to achieve the goal of agrarian reform.
First amendment inserted two new articles, namely, Article 31A and Article 31B. Article 31A gave immense rights to the state to acquire any property while Article 31B provided security to 13 acts and regulations under a ninth schedule which is liable to be impugned under article 13(2).
The Fourth Amendment: This amendment made further amendments in the Article 31A which protected certain laws against any attack based on fundamental rights. It added seven more acts to ninth schedule making them immune from any challenges.
The Seventeenth Amendment: The Supreme Court struck down the ‘Kerela Agrarian Relations Act 1961’ in its application to the erstwhile state of Madras. It held that lands held by ryotwari tenants were not “estates” within the meaning of Article 31A. The court also struck down the Madras Land Reforms (fixation of ceiling on land) act, 1961 on the ground that some of its provisions violated article 14. Several other acts in different states were also struck down citing similar reasons. This led to the enactment of the seventeenth Constitutional amendment.
It amended the article 31A of the Constitution, and enlarged the definition of estate, so as to include any land held under ryotwari settlement or any other land under its purview. It further added 44 more acts within the ninth schedule to protect them from any violation of fundamental rights.
The validity of this amendment was challenged in Sajjan Singh v. the State of Rajasthan. The court held the amendment constitutionally valid as the word “law” under Article 13(2) does not include a law passed by parliament by virtue of its constituent power taking away or abridging the fundamental rights.
Golak Nath Case: The validity of first, fourth and seventeenth amendment was challenged in Golak Nath v. the State of Punjab. The court said that the definition of law under Article 13(3) included any law or amendment passed by parliament under its ordinance legislative power and therefore it would be void if it takes away any of the fundamental rights. Subsequently, the first, fourth and seventeenth amendment was held invalid. However, on the application of the doctrine of “Prospective overruling”, the amendments still continue to be valid even though they violate fundamental rights.
The Twenty-fifth Amendment: This amendment permitted the acquisition of private property by the government for public use on the payment of adequate compensation which will be decided by the parliament and not by courts. It also exempted any law giving effect to article 39(b) and (c) from judicial review, even if they violate fundamental rights.
Conclusion
Despite the efforts made to reform the agrarian structure of the country, the situation remains not as much satisfactory as expected. According to the planning commission’s task force, although the abolition of intermediaries and Zamindari System were successful, tenancy reforms didn’t yield the result which was expected. Therefore, the agrarian situation in the country remains more or less same and we further need to work more efficiently to achieve the objectives of agrarian reforms.
By-
Abhishek Kumar
Banaras Hindu University, Varanasi
References:
- 1.http://www.legalservicesindia.com/article/576/Land-Reforms-&-Duty-Of-State.html
- https://www.jstor.org/stable/758169
- Sajjan Singh v. the State of Rajasthan, 1965 AIR 845
- Golak Nath v. State of Punjab, 1967 AIR 1643
- http://legislative.gov.in/
- https://indiankanoon.org/
Previous post: https://desikanoon.in/acid-attack-an-obnoxious-act-in-india/