Mehbooba asks Omar Abdullah to allocate ‘unproductive land, not orchards’ to BSF

The statement by former Jammu and Kashmir Chief Minister Mehbooba Mufti, urging Omar Abdullah to allocate 'unproductive land' instead of 'productive orchards' to the Border Security Force (BSF), encapsulates a complex and sensitive issue at the heart of governance in the Union Territory. This seemingly localized concern about land allocation actually reflects deeper tensions surrounding security imperatives, local livelihoods, economic development, and the political landscape of J&K post-abrogation of Article 370.

**Background Context: A Land of Contention**

Jammu and Kashmir has a long history of being a region of strategic importance, leading to a significant presence of security forces. Historically, land acquisition for defense and security purposes has been a recurring theme. The abrogation of Article 370 and Article 35A on August 5, 2019, fundamentally altered J&K's constitutional status, converting it into a Union Territory and bringing it under more direct central control. A significant consequence was the amendment of various state laws, including land laws. Previously, Article 35A protected land ownership rights exclusively for permanent residents, preventing outsiders from purchasing land. Post-abrogation, the Union government introduced the Jammu and Kashmir Reorganisation (Adaptation of State Laws) Order, 2020, which modified several land-related statutes, including the Jammu and Kashmir Development Act, 1970. These changes removed the requirement of domicile for land ownership in some cases, opening up the region for non-domicile investors and potentially for easier land acquisition by central agencies. This backdrop is crucial as it creates a sense of vulnerability among locals regarding their land and resources.

**What Happened: The Plea for Livelihoods**

Mehbooba Mufti, leader of the Jammu and Kashmir Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), voiced her strong objection to the potential allocation of 'productive orchards'—likely apple orchards, which are a cornerstone of Kashmir's economy—to the BSF. Her appeal to Omar Abdullah, Vice President of the National Conference (NC), indicates a plea across party lines, highlighting the severity of the issue for the local populace. Mufti's core argument is rooted in the economic distress and high unemployment rates prevalent in J&K. She emphasized that productive agricultural land, which directly supports thousands of families, should not be diverted for security infrastructure. Instead, she suggested allocating 'unproductive' or barren land, which would minimize the impact on local livelihoods and the agricultural economy.

**Key Stakeholders Involved**

1. **Mehbooba Mufti (PDP):** Represents a significant political voice in J&K, advocating for local interests and expressing concerns about economic hardship and land rights.

2. **Omar Abdullah (NC):** Another prominent political figure and former CM, whose party also champions regional autonomy and protection of local interests. Mufti's appeal to him suggests a shared concern among mainstream regional parties.

3. **Border Security Force (BSF):** A Central Armed Police Force (CAPF) under the Ministry of Home Affairs, responsible for guarding India's land borders. Their operational requirements often necessitate land for establishing camps, training facilities, and infrastructure.

4. **Local Residents/Farmers:** The primary affected party, whose livelihoods depend on agriculture, particularly the lucrative horticulture sector. Their economic stability and cultural ties to land are at stake.

5. **Union Territory Administration & Union Government:** Responsible for governance, security, and development in J&K. They must balance national security needs with local socio-economic concerns.

**Why This Matters for India: A Delicate Balance**

This issue holds significant implications for India. Firstly, it underscores the persistent challenge of balancing national security imperatives with local developmental needs and socio-economic stability in sensitive border regions. While security forces require adequate infrastructure, their expansion must not alienate the local population or severely impact their economic well-being. Secondly, it highlights the ongoing political discourse in J&K post-2019. Regional parties are striving to regain their political footing by championing local issues, demonstrating the continuing relevance of regional voices. Thirdly, from an economic standpoint, horticulture, especially apple cultivation, is a major contributor to J&K's GDP and provides direct and indirect employment. Diverting such land could exacerbate unemployment, potentially leading to social unrest. The issue also touches upon the broader theme of land reforms and acquisition in India, governed by the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (LARR Act).

**Historical Context and Future Implications**

Historically, the security footprint in J&K has been substantial due to cross-border terrorism and internal security challenges. Post-Article 370 abrogation, the Union Government has emphasized integrating J&K more fully into the national mainstream, which includes streamlining administrative processes and land laws. However, these changes have also created anxieties about demographic shifts and loss of traditional land rights. The LARR Act, 2013, provides a framework for land acquisition, emphasizing public purpose, fair compensation, and rehabilitation. While the Act applies to J&K post-2019, the 'public purpose' argument for security forces often faces scrutiny regarding alternative land options.

Looking ahead, the situation presents a critical test for the UT administration and the Union Government. A heavy-handed approach to land acquisition, particularly of productive land, risks fueling local resentment and further complicating the security situation. Conversely, a sensitive approach, prioritizing unproductive land and ensuring fair compensation and rehabilitation where productive land is unavoidable, could foster trust and contribute to long-term stability. This incident also signals the continued efforts of regional political parties to articulate local grievances and shape the narrative in J&K, emphasizing the need for inclusive governance that respects local economies and aspirations.

**Related Constitutional Articles, Acts, or Policies**

* **Jammu and Kashmir Reorganisation Act, 2019:** This foundational act converted J&K into a UT and paved the way for the application of central laws, including changes to land laws.

* **The Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (LARR Act):** This central law, now applicable to J&K, governs the process of land acquisition, compensation, and resettlement, emphasizing public purpose and social impact assessment.

* **Seventh Schedule of the Constitution (Entry 18, State List):** Traditionally, 'Land' is a state subject. While J&K is a UT, the spirit of local control over land use remains a political and administrative consideration. The Union Government, through the UT administration, now has more direct control over land policies.

* **Article 246:** Defines legislative powers between the Union and States/UTs. For J&K, the legislative powers are now more aligned with other UTs with legislatures, but ultimate control rests with the Union Parliament and Government.

* **Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA):** The BSF operates under the MHA, which is the nodal ministry for internal security and central armed police forces. Any land allocation for BSF would fall under the purview of MHA and the UT administration.