International Research Journal of Management Sociology & Humanities
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
International Research Journal of Management Sociology & Humanities ISSN 2277 – 9809 (online) ISSN 2348 - 9359 (Print) An Internationally Indexed Peer Reviewed & Refereed Journal Shri Param Hans Education & Research Foundation Trust www.IRJMSH.com www.SPHERT.org Published by iSaRa Solutions IRJMSH Vol 5 Issue 10 [Year 2014] ISSN 2277 – 9809 (0nline) 2348–9359 (Print) Dalit Access to Land in Rajasthan: Land Reform as Redistributive Justice since Independence Lakshmi Narayan Singh Reena Gupta Research Scholar (PhD) Research Scholar (PhD) Department of History and Culture Department of Educational Studies Jamia Millia Islamia, New Delhi Jamia Millia Islamia, New Delhi ―We have no land because others have usurped it ...‖ -Dr. Ambedkar Abstract In the traditional Hindu hierarchical society Dalits were called Shudras or Harijans or Panchmas and were socially, economically and politically a suppressed people. Placed at the bottom of the caste hierarchy they survived by performing functions like scavenging, leatherwork, etc. During colonial period they constituted the bulk of the agricultural labour force and worked as farm servants and casual labourers. Very few (less than 10%) Dalit families possessed agricultural land. They had no right to own land nor were they considered to be peasants or tillers of the soil. The existing social customs did not grant them the status of occupancy tenant, though they might have cultivated lands as tenants and sharecroppers. In the case of untouchables, therefore, there was a clear correspondence/correlation between social and economic status. Land is the basis of all economic activity. It is the most important asset in an agrarian economy like India where majority of the population in rural areas are dependent on agriculture, labour and animal husbandry. Land issues have thus attracted equal attention from policy makers and academicians. After independence, India engaged in a conscious process of nation building with stress on high productivity and equitable distribution of land. In rural societies, ownership of land is coterminous with social status. Its unequal distribution reflects prevailing social stratification and helps maintain the hierarchical structure of the society. While large landowners invariably belong to the upper castes and the cultivators to the middle castes, agricultural workers are largely Dalits and tribals. The denial of access to land, functions as a means of exclusion and a mechanism of bondage. Landlessness is at the core of Dalit dependence on caste Hindus. The unequal land distribution has created a kind of class of society in our villages. So the unequal distribution of land has created a lot of gap between the rich and the poor and further created independency on landlords. The landless, whose only remaining asset is their labour remain dependent on large land holders for their survival. When Dalits seek protection of the law against caste Hindu atrocities, retaliation comes in the form of denial of wage work on the lands of caste Hindus. Land reforms in India helped to abolish all forms of intermediaries in terms of landholdings viz, Zamindari, Inamdari and landlord system. Those tilling the land at the time of the abolition of intermediaries were conferred ownership rights and tenants were given protection. International Research Journal of Management Sociology & Humanity ( IRJMSH ) Page 307 www.irjmsh.com IRJMSH Vol 5 Issue 10 [Year 2014] ISSN 2277 – 9809 (0nline) 2348–9359 (Print) Introduction The Dalits In the traditional Hindu hierarchical society Dalits were called Shudras or Harijans or Panchmas and were socially, economically and politically a suppressed people. Placed at the bottom of the caste hierarchy they survived by performing functions like scavenging, leatherwork, etc. During colonial period they constituted the bulk of the agricultural labour force and worked as farm servants and casual labourers. Very few (less than 10%) Dalit families possessed agricultural land. They had no right to own land nor were they considered to be peasants or tillers of the soil. The existing social customs did not grant them the status of occupancy tenant, though they might have cultivated lands as tenants and sharecroppers. In the case of untouchables, therefore, there was a clear correspondence/correlation between social and economic status. And yet in the 1920s and 1930s militant Dalits throughout India were more concerned about the identity questions. They rejected both the Harijans and Ati-shudra identity and struggle for equal rights. Land is the basis of all economic activity. It is the most important asset in an agrarian economy like India where majority of the population in rural areas are dependent on agriculture, labour and animal husbandry. Land issues have thus attracted equal attention from policy makers and academicians. After independence, India engaged in a conscious process of nation building with stress on high productivity and equitable distribution of land. In rural societies, ownership of land is coterminous with social status. Its unequal distribution reflects prevailing social stratification and helps maintain the hierarchical structure of the society. While large landowners invariably belong to the upper castes and the cultivators to the middle castes, agricultural workers are largely Dalits and tribals. The denial of access to land, functions as a means of exclusion and a mechanism of bondage. Landlessness is at the core of Dalit dependence on caste Hindus. The unequal land distribution has created a kind of class of society in our villages. So the unequal distribution of land has created a lot of gap between the rich and the poor and further created independency on landlords. The landless, whose only remaining asset is their labour remain dependent on large land holders for their survival. When Dalits seek protection of the law against caste Hindu atrocities, retaliation comes in the form of denial of wage work on the lands of caste Hindus. This is often coupled with social boycott, which includes the stoppage of water supply to Dalit lands, non-supply of necessities of life and so on. Fair distribution of land strikes at the roots of an unequal social order and skewed power relations. It frees the marginalized from the clutches of perpetual bondage, for want of a sustainable livelihood. Laws and regulations in India prohibit the alienation of Dalit lands, set ceilings on a single landowner's holdings, and allocate surplus government lands to be re-distributed to Scheduled Castes (SCs) and Scheduled Tribes (STs). However, land ownership patterns remain skewed. Land reforms resulted in the creation of middle level peasant who belonged to all castes except the scheduled caste.1 Land reforms in India helped to abolish all forms of intermediaries in terms of landholdings viz, Zamindari, Inamdari and landlord system. Those tilling the land at the time of the abolition of intermediaries were conferred ownership rights and tenants were given protection. The 1 Smita Narula, Broken People: Caste Violence against India's Untouchables (Human Rights Watch, 1999), p. 27- 28. International Research Journal of Management Sociology & Humanity ( IRJMSH ) Page 308 www.irjmsh.com IRJMSH Vol 5 Issue 10 [Year 2014] ISSN 2277 – 9809 (0nline) 2348–9359 (Print) protection and enlargement of control and command over land are crucial issues for the poor. It is estimated that all efforts taken together including Bhoodan and distribution of government wasteland accounted for less than10 percent of the cultivated land25. It may not be possible for all rural poor to be accommodated but there is scope for utilizing the wasteland for providing access to the poor and also eliminating the bias against the poor in land relations. The desire to possess land is strong among the poor as ownership of land denotes one‘s social status. The small extent of the declared surplus was due mainly to the poor legislation with large number of loopholes. Thus, the opportunity for a more equitable distribution of land was lost. However the abolition of intermediaries and imposition of land ceiling on land-holdings had, over time, contributed to the growth of capitalist farming and arrested concentration of land ownership. Although intermediate land tenure system could be effectively removed through Zamindari abolition, equity in the agrarian structure could not be brought about. Concentration of land shifted from a few individuals to a few communities. Land reforms with four important components - abolition of intermediaries, tenancy reforms, fixing ceiling on land holdings and consolidation of land holdings - were major policy interventions. It was a strategy of social change through the intervention of the state. However, reform implementation was radical and successful in some respects like abolition of intermediaries while ceiling on land holdings was imposed with a half-hearted approach leading to dismal failure in many states.2 I Land Distribution and Status of Dalit Land is considered to be the most important productive asset and its possession is the prime indicator of status in rural India. More than three decades‘ time has elapsed since the enactment of Land Reforms legislations in different States, paving the way for limiting the extent of land held by a person and the distribution of surplus land to poorer sections. It is pertinent here to examine the position and utilization of land by the poorer sections and whether it has brought out any significant changes in their livelihood.