Jammu: A private member’s bill allowing renewal of leases of government land was introduced in the Jammu and Kashmir Legislative Assembly on Wednesday after the ruling National Conference decided not to oppose it, but Chief Minister Omar Abdullah said they will take a call on supporting its passage once the debate is completed.
The opposition BJP alleged that the ruling party was using its mandate “not for the public good, but to protect the interests of the elite”, calling it a “breach of trust” and “disappointing”.
National Conference legislator Tanvir Sadiq moved the bill to restore the Jammu and Kashmir Land Grants Act, 1960, and the rules framed under it in their original form, as they existed before the Jammu and Kashmir Land Grant Rules, 2022, were enacted, to protect the rights of existing leases and occupants.
The chief minister, who also holds the Revenue portfolio, said he would not oppose its introduction.
“A private member’s bill has been introduced by the member. If I were to respond in line with what has been communicated to me by the department, I would have to oppose it. However, if I oppose it at this stage, it is likely that no one except Sadiq will get an opportunity to speak on it.
“I want the House to discuss this in detail. After that, the government will take a decision on whether to support the bill or not. Therefore, at this stage, I will not oppose its introduction,” Abdullah said.
Accordingly, Speaker Abdul Rahim Rather put the motion to a voice vote which was cleared with the support of the ruling National Conference, while the opposition remained silent.
Earlier, Sadiq defended the introduction of the bill, saying the 1960 Act was amended by the Lt Governor-led administration in 2022 without the involvement of the legislature.
He said the Bill intends to address the concerns of individuals who had legally acquired land on lease for purposes such as schools, shops, residential houses and hotels.
“This is meant to provide relief to legal leaseholders and not those who have encroached on government land,” the NC leader asserted.
If passed, the bill would allow renewal of existing leases instead of fresh auctions, providing major relief to several hotel owners whose leases have either expired or are nearing expiry.
In August last year, authorities ordered the eviction of the iconic Hotel Nedous in Gulmarg in north Kashmir, citing “unauthorised occupation” of government land.
Earlier in 2023, the government retrieved 40 kanals of land allegedly occupied by the owners of Hotel Nedou’s at MA Road in Srinagar. The lessees of both properties are related to the Abdullah family.
The Leader of Opposition in J&K Assembly, Sunil Sharma, who was not present in the House, termed the introduction of the bill as “disappointing”.
“Your (people’s) mandate now appears to be used not for the public good, but to protect elite interests – be it Nedous, the chief minister’s personal property, or a circle of influential, cocktail-circuit associates,” Sharma said in a post on social media.
He said the chief minister lost no time in permitting the private member’s bill. “This raises serious concerns. The move seems to be setting the stage for re-leasing vast tracts of government land at throwaway prices – continuing a pattern that has persisted for decades. What message does this send to the common citizen?” he said.
The BJP leader said it is unfortunate that instead of safeguarding public assets and ensuring justice for the marginalised, the government appears to be “enabling and patronising a privileged few – those who have long benefited at the cost of the poor”.
“This is not just disappointing – it is a betrayal of trust,” he said.
Another private member’s bill was introduced by MLA Sajad Shaheen. This bill seeks to “provide for the establishment of a university campus at Banihal in District Ramban to promote higher education, research, and socio-economic development in the region and for matters connected therewith or incidental thereto (L.A. Private Members’ Bill No. 46 of 2025).”
Speaking on the bill, Education Minister Sakeena Itoo stated that the government would not oppose its introduction for discussion.
This bill was also subsequently allowed to be introduced through a voice vote.
