What is the background and history of land reforms in India? What is the regional variation in the implementation of land reforms? Read further to know more.
Land reforms in India usually refer to redistribution of land from the rich to the poor.
Land reforms are often connected with the re-distribution of agricultural land and hence it is related to agrarian reforms too.
Land reforms include regulation of ownership, operation, leasing, sales, and inheritance of land (indeed, the redistribution of the land itself requires legal changes).
Also read: Tebhaga Movement
Background and History of Land Reforms in India
In any country, the basis of all economic activity is the land. If we examine the history of India, though there are instances of considering land as private property by individuals who had control over it, the practice of communities like that of tribals with collective ownership of land stands out. Land like many other gifts of nature was considered free for all by many communities who didn’t bother to fix boundaries for private ownership. However, the colonial rule by the British saw a dramatic shift in the land ownership pattern of India. Land of many tribal/forest communities was seized by British cultivators and Zamindars, and land tax was widely collected through systems like Zamindari, Ryotwari, or Mahalwari.
A rich-minority-landowning class and a poor-landless-peasant class became symbols of Indian agrarian society. As the ownership of the land for some reason or other stayed with the rich Zamindar class, they became more powerful year after year, accumulating wealth. The peasants, who actually cultivated the land, were often in poverty and remained landless. When India adopted socialistic principles after independence, equality in all spheres – social, economic, and political was envisioned. Land reforms are essential steps towards social and economic equality as land is a fundamental asset needed for the healthy development of an individual. As per the Indian constitution, land reform comes under the list of state subjects, and hence the responsibility for bringing up regulations for effecting land reforms lies with individual states.
States which implemented land reforms in India
Zamindari Abolition Act was passed by UP, Tamil Nadu, Bihar, Madhya Pradesh, etc. Surplus lands were confiscated from zamindars. As in the Golaknath case, the Supreme Court ruled that the provisions of the Zamindari Abolition Act contradicted Article 31 of the Indian Constitution, the parliament took steps to repeal Article 31. Later Land Ceilings Act was passed by different states.
Successful legislation for redistribution of land with ceilings on private land property happened only in a few states. The most notable and successful land reforms happened in the states of Kerala and West Bengal (Operation Barga). Only pockets of India like Jammu and Kashmir witnessed commendable steps in land reform but attempts in states like Andra Pradesh, Madya Pradesh, and Bihar led to clashes within the communities. Though the Central Land Reforms Committee has laid guidelines for land ceilings, there was a purposeful delay in the implementation of land reform policy in many states, giving a gap for transactions to escape the tooth of land reform laws.
The other sides of land reforms
Land reforms have an angle other than cultivation purposes. The redistribution of land becomes a necessity often for development and manufacturing purposes too. This necessitates a proper land policy, which gives due importance to nature, development, and inclusion. Deeper structural reforms will ensure that the exercise of land redistribution actually becomes meaningful, enabling small farmers to turn their plots into productive assets. When every citizen of the country enjoys the benefits of ownership of land, it can lead to social and economic upliftment.
There are arguments in favor of and against land reforms.
Arguments in Favor of Land Reforms
- Equity – now the majority of land in India is enjoyed by a minority of landlords.
- The inverse relationship between land size and efficiency – the smaller the land, the better will be the productivity and efficiency.
- Owner cultivation is more efficient than share-cropping.
Arguments Against Land Reforms
- If centrally managed large agricultural land is divided among individual private owners, the peasants who take it up may not be efficient enough to individually carry out the cultivation.
- Results in Fragmentation of land and pockets of inefficiency. For large-scale cultivation, the fragmentation of land normally won’t help (this has another side too – see the inverse relationship).
- Evidence suggests that land reforms had a negative effect on poverty.
- Land reforms have led to economic decline and food insecurity in countries like Zimbabwe.
Also read: RERA Act 2016