On Wednesday, July 30th, the Uttar Pradesh Assembly passed the Uttar Pradesh Nazul Properties (Management and Utilization for Public Purposes) Bill, 2024, despite strong opposition from both the INDIA bloc and members of the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) along with its allies.
Uttar Pradesh: The Uttar Pradesh Assembly passed the Uttar Pradesh Nazul Properties (Management and Utilization for Public Purposes) Bill, 2024 on Wednesday (30th July), despite significant opposition from both the INDIA bloc and members of the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) along with its allies.
READ ALSO: ‘Forced Conversions & Love Jihad’| UP Legislative Assembly Passes Life Imprisonment Law
Objectives of the Bill
The Bill aims to regulate Nazul land—Government-owned but not directly managed as state property—by preventing its conversion into private ownership.
Under this legislation, any court proceedings or applications for transferring Nazul land to private individuals or institutions will be cancelled and rejected, ensuring these lands remain under Government control.
Refunds with interest will be provided for any payments made in anticipation of ownership changes, based on the State Bank of India’s Marginal Cost of Funds Based Lending Rate (MCLR) from the deposit date.
Additionally, the Bill allows the Government to extend leases for current leaseholders who regularly pay rent and comply with lease terms, ensuring they can continue using the land while maintaining it as government property. This aims to streamline Nazul land management and prevent unauthorized privatization.
Why the Nazul Property Bill is Needed
Khanna emphasized the pressing necessity for land to support various development activities of public importance. He noted that acquiring land for these purposes would typically involve substantial expenses and significant delays.
Uttar Pradesh has Nazul land leased to private individuals and entities under the Government Grants Act of 1895 and 1960. Over time, the UP Government has introduced policies to declare Nazul land freehold in the public interest.
Khanna highlighted that previous policies led to numerous claims, depleting land banks. He argued that it is no longer beneficial for the UP Government to allow the conversion of Nazul land into freehold, given the public interest.
Reclaiming Nazul land without resorting to land acquisition laws would make land readily available to the government.
Following the repeal of the Government Grants Act of 1895 by Parliament, the UP Government stayed all policies related to the management and disposal of Nazul land. Khanna explained that many litigations are pending in courts, seeking conversion of Nazul land into freehold, creating uncertainties regarding the government’s interests.
He concluded by stressing the need for legislation that would enable the state government to reclaim Nazul land for public use and development activities that have been hindered by the lack of available land.
Despite the controversies and debates, the UP Assembly eventually passed the Nazul Properties Bill, aiming to provide relief for economically weaker sections of society while ensuring efficient land management for public development.
READ ALSO: Lok Sabha Passes Landmark Jammu and Kashmir Bills: A Legislative Milestone
Internal Conflicts Between BJP’s Own MLAs Objected to the Bill
Harshvardhan Bajpai
BJP MLA from Prayagraj, Harshvardhan Bajpai, opposed the Bill on Wednesday, arguing against the prevention of converting Nazul land into private freehold.
He said,
“Taking one or two properties won’t make a difference. I’m concerned about those living in small slums, known as ‘Sagar Pesha’ in Prayagraj, a term from the British Raj for followers in service given space near bungalows. These families have lived there for over a century. On one hand, we provide housing to the poor under the PM Awas Yojna, and on the other, we’re displacing thousands. This is not just,” said Bajpai, the first to voice objections.
Bajpai further illustrated his point with an example of a homemaker whose house occupies a 100-yard area.
“She questioned what the government gains from this small piece of land. Our leadership aims for clear property rights. Prime Minister Modi has emphasized the need for clarity in property and intellectual property rights,” Bajpai added.
Suresh Khanna
Parliamentary Affairs Minister Suresh Khanna interrupted, telling Bajpai, “You don’t understand. Read it first.”
However, Bajpai insisted on including a provision in the law to allow current Nazul landholders the chance to convert their land into freehold.
Sidharth Nath Singh
Another BJP MLA from Prayagraj, Sidharth Nath Singh, also objected, suggesting that feedback should be considered.
He stated,
“Those with legitimate ownership of Nazul land should have their leases renewed.”
Raghuraj Pratap Singh
Jansatta Dal Loktantrik MLA Raghuraj Pratap Singh echoed these concerns, noting that while the bill may seem minor, its consequences are significant. “Siddharth Nath Singh and Harshvardhan are opposing this bill for the party’s benefit.
There’s a case where the High Court is on Nazul land. Will that be vacated too? The government should reconsider this Bill,”
he said.
Anil Tripathi and Aradhana Mishra Mona
Anil Tripathi from the Nishad Party demanded amendments and suggested the bill be reviewed by the Select Committee. Congress MLA Aradhana Mishra Mona called the bill anti-people, urging reconsideration.
She argued,
“This law will destroy homes built with a lifetime’s hard-earned money, rendering lakhs homeless and facilitating large-scale misuse. Government offices and hospitals are also built on Nazul land.”
Pidharth Nath Singh, another BJP MLA from Prayagraj, suggested incorporating feedback from stakeholders, emphasizing that those with bonafide ownership should have their leases renewed.
Jansatta Dal Loktantrik MLA Raghuraj Pratap Singh also criticized the Bill, noting its significant consequences and calling for reconsideration.
Anil Tripathi of the Nishad Party and Congress MLA Aradhana Mishra Mona echoed these sentiments, with Mishra labeling the Bill as anti-people.
Government’s Response and Clarifications
State Parliamentary Affairs Minister Suresh Kumar Khanna assured the Assembly that the Bill provides relief for economically weaker sections, asserting that the state government would address the concerns raised by the opposition.
He emphasized that Nazul land belongs to the government under the Constitution and cannot be privately owned. Khanna reassured that compliant leaseholders would have their leases renewed and that educational institutions and other critical facilities would not be removed.
