Jai Ram Sounds Alarm Over Proposed Land Law Changes

Jai Ram Thakur, the former Chief Minister and current leader of the opposition, has launched a strong attack on the state government, accusing it of planning to “sell off the state’s interests” by changing a key land protection law.

At the heart of the controversy is Section 118 of the Himachal Pradesh Tenancy and Land Reforms Act. This law has long been a cornerstone of the state’s land policy, designed to protect local interests by restricting the sale of land to outsiders without government approval.

Government vs. Opposition: A Clash of Perspectives

The current government, led by Chief Minister Sukhvinder Singh Sukhu, argues that they only want to “simplify” the procedure. They say this will cut through red tape and encourage much-needed investment and development in the state.

However, the opposition BJP isn’t buying it. Thakur alleges that “simplification” is just a smokescreen.

The Opposition’s Case: A Pattern of “Selling Out“

Thakur has made several serious allegations to back up his claim:

· Hidden Motives: He insists the real goal is to benefit the government’s “business associates,” not the people of Himachal.
· A “Puppet” Government: He went so far as to call Chief Minister Sukhu a “puppet in the hands of corrupt officials and the mafia,” claiming these vested interests are driving the agenda.
· A Slippery Slope: Thakur points to the government’s previous move to exempt religious organizations from this law, allowing them to sell land. He warned then that it would open the door to further relaxations.
· Past Examples: He cited a controversial (and now court-stayed) attempt to sell a large parcel of land belonging to Palampur Agricultural University and plans to sell over 20 state-run hotels as evidence of the government’s intentions.
· Broader Accusations: The opposition leader also accused the government of allowing “rampant illegal mining” and giving a “contract for extortion” to its allies.

A Firm Stance and a Warning

Thakur asserted that the state’s natural resources should be used for the benefit of its people and the environment, not for a select few. He ended with a direct warning to the government: “The Chief Minister should not even attempt to touch Section 118. Otherwise, we will not hesitate to take to the streets.”

In short, while the government sees updating Section 118 as a move for progress, the opposition sees it as a betrayal of the state’s identity and interests, setting the stage for a major political battle.