In this essay we will discuss about:- 1. Introduction to Land Reforms 2. Estimate of the Progress of Land Reforms in India 3. Appraisal 4. Impact.
Introduction to Land Reforms:
The objectives of economic planning in a developing economy like ours are:
(a) To achieve maximum production,
(b) To attain a measure of social justice,
(c) To reduce economic inequalities and avoid concentration of economic power and
(d) To prevent exploitation of the under-privileged classes.
To accelerate development of agriculture, it is also necessary to bring about a reorientation of the social institutions which act as impediments in the path of rural development.
For the development of a poor economy land reforms have a special significance, because the prevalence of the feudal system and rack-renting and the existence of small-sized farms, insecurity of tenancy rights act as serious hurdles to the growth of agriculture.
If the land reforms have to attain the objectives of raising agricultural productivity and achieving, a measure of social justice, they must include redistribution of land ownership in favour of the cultivators so that they may have a sense of participation in the life of the rural community. They must also bring into existence holdings of economic size, provide security of tenure and fair rent for the tenant. These, in fact, are the objectives kept in view in land reforms in India.
Thus land reforms were assigned a special place in our 5-year Plans. A comprehensive land policy was set out in the Plans providing for elimination of intermediary rights, tenancy reforms including regulation of rent, security of tenure and transfer of ownership to tenants, imposition of ceilings on land holdings, consolidation of holdings, prevention of fragmentation, etc.
A short account of the land reforms is given here as under:
(1) Abolition of Intermediaries:
Intermediary rights have been abolished over about 40% of the area of the country, thus bringing about 20 mn. tenants into direct relationship with the Govt. Besides, large areas of cultivable waste lands and forests have come under the management of the State.
More than 9 mn. acres of cultivable waste lands had been distributed up to 1977 mainly to the landless agricultural workers. A sum of nearly Rs. 2,300 mn., out of total estimated amount of Rs. 6,410 mn. had been paid to the intermediaries as compensation in cash or in bonds.
(2) Tenancy Reforms:
The rent payable by tenants-at-will has been reduced from 50% or more to a maximum rent of 25% of 20% of the gross produce in many States. However, in some States the prevailing rate of rent is still as high as 33% of the produce or even more. Legislation providing for security of tenure has been enacted in almost all States. Karnataka and Orissa laws have been passed but not enforced yet.
(3) Ceilings in Holdings:
The ceiling legislation has been passed in all States, though the implementation thereof has made progress in some States only. As a result lakhs of acres have been taken into possession by State and distributed among the landless tillers or labourers.
(4) Consolidation of Holdings:
In order to enlarge the size of land holdings ; consolidation of uneconomic holdings was under-taken and substantial progress has been made in this connection in the Punjab, Haryana, Rajasthan, Uttar Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh and Maharashtra.
(5) Reorganisation of Agriculture:
Besides measures like consolidation of holdings, ceilings on holdings, steps have been taken to develop cooperative farming as a measure for the reorganisation of agriculture.
Estimate of the Progress of Land Reforms in India:
Before we give our separate comments on the progress of land reforms we have to make 2 general observations:
(1) The pace of implementation of reforms measure has been slow. A great deal of benefit has been lost due to deficiencies in implementation. Introduction of bills or enactment of legislation does not carry us far if the process of implementation is not expedited. Indeed the prevailing uncertainty in the rural sector and the resulting fall in production are in no small measure due to the undue prolongation of reforms which are radical in nature.
(2) There is marked unevenness in respect of progress in the States and in respect of reform measures too. Some diversity in the reform measures is, of course, inevitable but the degree of diversity that is presented in the overall picture of reforms all over the country is much larger than is warranted by difference in regional conditions. Below we attempt an estimate of progress in respect of the main features of land reforms.
Abolition of intermediaries has been greatly implemented. But the formal abolition of intermediary rights does not in all cases bring appreciable relief to the tiller unless he is in a position to pay compensation fixed by law for acquiring land. He has to pay the same rent to the State.
Regarding the rents changeable while several States have scaled them down, in a number of States the maximum fixed is still higher than 25% to 28% of gross produce recommended by the Planning Commission. While provisions regarding security of tenure have been enacted in several States, yet large-scale ejections of tenants continue in many States under one or the other pretext.
In some States laws about the resumption of land for personal cultivation have defined the terms “personal cultivation” so loosely or defectively that lands resumed by land-holders on ostensible grounds of personal cultivation are being cultivated through crop-sharing arrangements wherein the crop- sharers are treated as labourers.
Regarding ceilings on land holdings, although in almost all States some provision has been made in regard to future acquisitions, only in a few States or in their parts have steps been taken so far to fix an upper limit to existing holdings. A shrewd observers has, therefore, commented that the ceiling legislation is as if a notice to landlords so that they may find some loopholes in the legislation and make use of them in transferring lands.
This sort of comment may sound unduly harsh, but it cannot be denied that provisions against transfer and partition made in the ceilings legislation have been defective in most of the States that there have been large-scale benami transactions or changes of tenants. Besides, in regard to exemption from ceilings, there is a feeling that these rover vast areas in some of the States which should not have been exempted.
The word of consolidation of holdings has also made progress only in a few States. Elsewhere practically nothing has been done so far. Very few States have so far made provisions for regulating the standards of cultivation and management of land and resumption of land in case of failure to maintain those standards.
An Appraisal of Land Reform Policy:
Land reforms were conceived boldly but were implemented badly. The basic defect of the Indian land reform policy has been the slow pace at which the whole programme moved. This provided the landlords and other vested interests sufficient time to devise ingenious methods of bypassing legislation.
Land reforms in India failed to touch the issue of land distribution and prevent sub-letting and renting. A good many of those who cultivate the soil have no land rights whereas many of those who do not till still own and possess land.
There has been no uniformity in land reforms. In the matter of fixing rent, the variation is from 20% to 50% of gross produce between States. In some States there is not provision for bringing the tenants into direct touch with the State.
In states like Mysore and Orissa, there are no legislative provisions restricting mala fide transfers of land. In some States, the tenants have no right to purchase the land they cultivate. Land reforms fall within the purview of the State Governments which have always been afraid to the landlords and hence failed to implement land reforms effectively.
Factor Impending Implementation:
It is obvious that in some States, the implementation has been delayed because of the lack of enforcing machinery. In others, there is mental reservation. A very disquieting feature of land reforms is that the record of rights is not yet complete in most of the States.
In the absence of complete record of rights, it is not possible to say what is the nature of tenancy and who are the people who lease lands. It is, therefore, necessary to expedite the completion of records, so that a clear idea about the use of lands may be had. All this does not mean that there has been no achievement at all on the land reforms front since independence. But there can be no doubt that the progress made has been slow.
Impact of Land Reforms:
(1) Productive Efficiency:
So far as productive efficiency is concerned, the land reforms affected in India in recent years have not had any significant impact. This is mainly due to the fact the reforms have not been effectively implemented or the laws passed have not been fully enforced. The consolidation of holdings has not been completed, the legislations regarding ceiling on land holdings have not been enforced.
The ownership of land has not yet been fully transferred to the tillers; the actual rents still rule high and much higher than fixed by the law owing to universal land hunger; the security provided to the tenant is still on paper only.
Cooperative farming has not made much headway. In the absence of economic holdings being firmly in actual possession of the tiller in which he has a stake and permanent interest how can modern techniques or input be applied to land?
No wonder that productivity continues to be low. Thus the impact of land reforms on agricultural efficiency and productivity has been almost nil. Whatever progress has been achieved is solely due to the technological changes and progress.
(2) Social Justice:
As far as social justice is concerned, we might say that it has been achieved in a measure. This is mainly due to the fact that intermediaries have by and large disappeared from the scene. India no longer presents a position of feudalism at the top and serfdom at the bottom.
The tillers are no longer down-trodden people. They may not have become land-owners in law but they feel and behave as such all right. The tenancy laws have given them protection from exploitation by providing them security of tenure and fixing maximum chargeable rents.
The tillers are getting organised in many areas to protect their rights and get advantage of the benefits concerned on them by the Govt. A start has been made to fix the maximum amount of land which every family can hold and distribute the surplus and among small farmers and landless labourers. However, much more has to be done before social justice is established on solid foundation.
The Janata Party which was installed in power at the Centre in 1977 has in its manifesto stated that it is committed to agrarian reforms covering tenurial relationships and consolidation of holdings.
The Janata Party has accused the Congress government for insincere implementation of land reforms and has assumed that it “will honestly implement land legislation, provided machinery for scrutinizing fraudulent transfers and dispossession and plug such loop-holes as have come to light. Landlordism will be abolished. Surplus lands and other reclaimed land will be distributed among the landless, particularly Harijans and Adivasis.”
Since land reforms are a state subject, the extent of implementation will depend upon the co-operation of the state and the extent to which the Janata Government can subordinate the interests of the Kulak lobby against the interests of the depressed rural classes.
To conclude, land reform policies in India are steps in the right direction but the purposiveness of these policies has been adversely affected by poor implementation, defective legislation and dilatoriness on the part of State Government. It is high time that speedy action is taken in this regard.
The Fourth Plan rightly observed; “At the same time it should be recognised that land ownership is just one of the components, though an important one, of package required for higher production. Unless the beneficiaries of land reform, namely, the tenants and the new owners created as a result of tenancy reform and settlements on land, are provided with adequate agricultural credit, physical inputs and other essential services and facilities, it could not yield the expected results.”