EXCLUSIVE | Risky terrain: Karnataka cabinet rides through caution over land reforms

The government’s decision to open up agricultural land holdings was taken despite alarm bells being sounded within the administration on the potential dangers of this move, an internal document has revealed.

On June 11, the Cabinet decided to amend the Karnataka Land Reforms Act, allowing even non-agriculturists to purchase and own farm lands by repealing Sections 79 A and B.

The sections will be repealed with retrospective effect, which will have a bearing on over 12,000 cases of violations in purchasing farm lands that are pending before various courts.

A day before the Cabinet, on June 10, an alarm was sounded at a meeting of the Cabinet sub-committee, whose proceedings have been recorded in a note that DH has accessed. Retrospective amendment of the law can be legally challenged, the Parliamentary Affairs secretary warned, adding that the original owners of lands confiscated by the government could move court.

This was brushed aside by Law Minister J C Madhuswamy. “Even the courts have favoured repealing 79 A and B,” he said, adding that the amendment will not apply to adjudicated cases.

The note also mentions a writ petition in the High Court in connection with proceedings under Sections 79 A and B. The HC, according to portions of its orders reproduced in the note, did not ask the government to repeal the two sections.

“An examination of the orders passed by the High Court...indicates that the court was concerned about how the orders passed under Section 79 A and B were being implemented on the ground,” Advocate-General Prabhuling K Navadgi stated in his opinion to the government dated June 3. He goes on to opine that it was up to the government to delete the two sections from the statute book. “According to me, there is no necessity of bringing the same to the High Court (sic). It is open for the government to proceed in accordance with law.”

The proposed land reforms have raised concerns that farm lands will be misused. That is why, on May 30, the agriculture department told the government that the move should help the growth of the agri sector, and that only those lands that are unfit or unused for agriculture can be purchased. “If the land is not used for agriculture or other activities within three years, then such land should be recovered by the government,” it said.

The note also reveals that the Department of Parliamentary Affairs & Legislation had opined, in March, that it was “necessary” to retain some of the restrictions under Section 79 B.