By Tehleel Sathoo
Jammu and Kashmir, a region shaped by its distinctive history and socio-political dynamics, stands at a critical stage in its journey of governance and development. The National Conference assumed power after huge mandate and years of direct central administration, the expectations from the newly elected government are immense. This period represents not only an opportunity for governance but also a test of leadership and consolidating ‘people’s trust’ in navigating the complex challenges that have long defined the region.
The restoration of a democratically elected government follows the tumultuous changes of August 2019, when J&K’s special status under Article 370 was abrogated, altering its political and constitutional identity. The National Conference’s overwhelming mandate reflects both support for its leadership and a collective expression of dissatisfaction with recent political shifts. Addressing the accumulated grievances and restoring public confidence demands resolute action on a range of critical issues.
Central to this phase of governance are three interlinked priorities: the Resolution passed in the inaugural session of the new assembly, the ongoing debates surrounding the Reservation Policy, and the ambitious but contentious Road and Railway Projects. These pillars symbolize the region’s struggles and aspirations, touching upon themes of identity, equity, and infrastructure. Together, they represent a litmus test for the government’s ability to balance development with justice, economic progress with ecological sustainability, and political pragmatism with public sentiment.
Resolution: Strategic or Balanced?
The first assembly session in Jammu and Kashmir following the abrogation of Article 370 marked a significant milestone in the region’s political landscape. Under the leadership of the National Conference (NC), this session was defined by the passage of a carefully constructed resolution aimed at addressing the sensitive issue of Jammu and Kashmir’s special status. This resolution, while diplomatically worded, has stirred both support and criticism, encapsulating the complexities of regional and national politics.
The assembly session commenced with a governor’s address, emphasizing themes of development, infrastructure, and governance. The central government positioned the high voter turnout in the elections as an endorsement of the post-2019 political changes. However, for many in the region, this consolidation of voting percentage towards NC’s electoral victory reflects dissatisfaction with the abrogation of Jammu and Kashmir’s special status.
The phrasing of each point in the resolution reflects a deliberate choice of words that leaves much open to interpretation. For instance, the term “special status” lacks specificity, offering no explicit mention of Article 370, and the word “concern” feels restrained, as though avoiding an outright rejection of past changes. By using phrases like “any process for restoration,” the resolution opens doors to future discussions with a general demand for special status similar to many other states without necessarily committing to a specific political agenda. Jammu and Kashmir’s historical and political claim to such status is unique in terms of a reminiscent to the states and the union’s historical establishment of relationship. The absence of a strong, unified regional stance is significant; if anything, this moment called for a landmark expression of solidarity. Yet, the lack of alignment among regional players suggests that short-term strategy may be overshadowing the region’s long-term vision. It is a nuanced stance, carefully balancing the region’s aspirations with the political sensitivities at the center.
For the National Conference, this resolution represents both a calculated move and a missed opportunity. While it aligns with the INDIA alliance and positions the NC as a pragmatic force, it risks alienating those who sought a resolute defense of Jammu and Kashmir’s unique status. The cautious tone, while politically expedient, raises questions about the NC’s ability to galvanize regional unity and assert its mandate effectively.
In a region where political actions carry profound implications, this resolution has left many wondering whether it signifies a step toward meaningful change or yet another instance of compromise.
Reservation Policy: Political mismaneuve
In March 2024, the BJP-led administration amended the J&K Reservation Rules of 2005, a move that significantly reshaped the region’s reservation landscape. The amendments introduced an additional ten percent reservation to the Scheduled Tribe (ST) category, incorporating communities such as Paharis, Paddaris, Kolis, and Gadda Brahmins, while simultaneously increasing the OBC quota by four percent. As a result, the total reservation quota reached a staggering sixty percent, leaving just forty percent for the general category. This massive shift has sparked intense debate, especially when viewed through the lens of the 1992 Indira Sawhney verdict, which capped reservations at fifty percent. Yet, J&K joins states like Maharashtra, Rajasthan, Chhattisgarh, and Madhya Pradesh in breaching this constitutional limit—a precedent that raises critical questions about the sanctity of the Supreme Court’s guidelines.
Compounding the issue is the employment scenario in J&K, which already suffers from the highest unemployment rate in India at thirty-two percent, as per the National Statistics Office’s Periodic Labour Force Survey. Critics argue that the BJP’s move was less about governance and more about political maneuvering to secure a vote bank in the Pir Panchal region. However, this strategy has failed to deliver electoral gains, as evidenced by the party’s lackluster performance in recent Lok Sabha and state elections.
The National Conference, now at the helm with overwhelming public support, faces a dilemma. Revisiting the newly introduced quotas could alienate its voter base in Pir Panchal, where it is striving to consolidate its presence. Historically, once reservation benefits are granted, they are nearly impossible to retract. This creates a tightrope walk for the NC government, which must balance its aspiration of becoming a pan-J&K party with the risk of eroding trust among other regions and communities.
Adding to this complexity is the opposition from Gujjar communities, who argue that the newly inducted groups represent well-off, upper-class segments that do not require affirmative action. This contention highlights a deeper socio-economic divide and questions the merit-based justification of these reservations.
The problem extends further into the disproportionate allocation of reservations compared to population demographics. With 60% of government job reservations catering to just 30% of the population, the imbalance becomes glaring. The general category, which roughly constitutes 60-70% of the population, is left with only forty percent of job opportunities. This disparity has led to widespread discontent among general category aspirants, especially in J&K, where the absence of a robust industrial sector leaves government jobs as the primary source of employment.
Facing mounting pressure from job seekers and opposition parties like the PDP, the NC government, in a cabinet meeting 0n 22nd November , announced the formation of a subcommittee of three ministers to examine the reservation policy. However, this move has been widely criticized as a time-buying strategy. Many believe it is an attempt to deflect attention and avoid making politically risky decisions. Meanwhile, job notifications and examination results continue to highlight the diminishing opportunities for the general category, exacerbating frustration and disillusionment.
The government’s inability to address the issue decisively has pushed it into the legal domain, where it has become a sub -judice matter. While the judicial process offers a potential resolution, the protracted nature of court proceedings means that years could pass before any concrete outcome is achieved. In the meantime, the disparity in opportunities risks deepening, creating further socio-economic divides.
This scenario is particularly troubling in a region like J&K, where the reliance on government jobs is heightened by the lack of industrial or private-sector alternatives. The government’s hesitancy to act decisively threatens to erode public trust and fuel further resentment. Addressing these issues head-on is not just a political necessity but a moral imperative to prevent long-term damage to J&K’s social fabric.
Ring Road /Rail Project – Eclipsed Evil
The ongoing developments in Jammu and Kashmir, particularly regarding the rail and road projects, have become pivotal to the region’s future infrastructure. However, while these projects promise growth, they also come with significant challenges, primarily concerning land acquisition, ecological concerns, and socio-economic impacts, especially in the Kashmir division.
The Ring Road Project alongside development of ‘satellite towns’ in Kashmir has sparked considerable debate, primarily due to restrictions imposed on land sales in the vicinity. The government has prohibited land transactions within certain boundaries around the road, effectively limiting the ability of landowners to sell properties in case of financial emergencies. This is particularly problematic given that Kashmiri farmers hold the smallest land holdings in India, making land their primary, and often only, asset. The inability to sell land during times of crisis could severely impact their livelihood and financial stability.
In addition, land pooling, though a preferable alternative to outright acquisition, presents its own set of challenges. While it allows for the redistribution of land after development, it is hampered by slow developmental pace and uncertain capital value appreciation. Furthermore, without strict zoning controls, there is the potential for improper land use, leading to unplanned growth. The method is also difficult to implement in congested urban areas, further complicating matters.
Moreover, the lack of clarity surrounding the redistribution of land raises concerns. When land is exchanged for other parcels, it’s uncertain whether the replacement land will be equally fertile, accessible, or hold the same market value. This ambiguity makes landowners wary of the process, as they fear they may end up with less productive or less advantageous land, further exacerbating the risks for the local agricultural economy.
Similarly, the project, particularly the new line expansion in Kashmir, introduces its own set of complexities. Though infrastructure development is crucial, it should not come at the cost of environmental degradation and long-term socio-economic harm. The project’s need for land acquisition has raised concerns, especially given that post-2019 abrogation, central land acquisition laws now apply. There is significant ambiguity regarding the application of the 2013 Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, particularly in determining how land values will be assessed.
The Act mandates higher compensation for urban and rural lands, but questions persist about its application, especially concerning agricultural and horticultural land. For example, how will the value of horticultural land, including factors like the age, class, fruit bearing capacity and productivity of non – fruit bearing trees, be calculated? The Supreme Court’s intervention in cases like these is has been crucial, but the lack of clarity in current policies remains a concern.
Furthermore, the process of determining market value through stand-duty rates, which are primarily designed for taxation purposes, does not always reflect the true market value of land. There have been instances in which market values have been assessed based on outdated or inaccurate information, causing frustration among landowners and leading to prolonged legal battles. The issue is especially pronounced when the land in question is vital to the agrarian economy of Kashmir, where most people rely on agriculture for their livelihoods.
The environmental implications are another pressing concern, especially when land acquisition involves state-owned forests or ecologically sensitive areas. Historically, there has been a ban on cutting down certain species of trees, such as Chinar and walnut, without proper government permission. With the introduction of the rail project, it remains unclear how such regulations will be enforced, particularly in the absence of a comprehensive environmental assessment process.
In terms of ecological compensation, the concept of composite forestation—planting a similar number of trees in another area to replace those cut down—remains an unresolved issue. While the idea of compensatory afforestation is sound, its implementation has historically been lacking, and the government’s ability to properly enforce this policy is questionable. Additionally, the project surpasses the 50 crore mark, making it subject to the Environment Protection Act of 1986, which mandates an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA). However, even though the Supreme Court in MKRanjitsinh case affirms that the right to life under Article 21 includes the right to be protected from environmental harm, there has been no substantial move to address the long-term ecological consequences of such large-scale infrastructure projects.
Taken together, while both the rail and road projects in Kashmir offer immense potential for future growth, they must be implemented with caution, ensuring that landowners are fairly compensated and the environment is not unduly harmed. As these projects continue to develop, the challenges of land acquisition, environmental preservation, and socio-economic stability must remain at the forefront of decision-making, ensuring that progress does not come at the expense of the region’s delicate balance.
Litmus Test
The National Conference (NC) faces a significant challenge after its substantial mandate, which, while reflecting public dissatisfaction with the 2019 abrogation of Article 370, was more about voicing the people’s will for political change than a mandate for governance. The issues discussed—land acquisition, environmental concerns, slow development, and impacts on local agriculture—pose critical obstacles for the government.
NC must tread carefully, balancing governance and political interests, particularly with its promises of one lakh jobs and filling government vacancies, which have not been fully realized. The reservation issue further complicates matters, exposing tensions between local needs and political expectations.
The railway and ring road projects present opportunities for development but come with risks to the environment, economy, and social stability, particularly for farmers with limited land holdings. If not managed carefully, these projects could exacerbate the very discontent that brought the NC to power.
Moreover, the complexities of the reservation issue and lingering resentment over the abrogation of Article 370 have placed the NC in a difficult balancing act between appeasing both the central government and the opposition. This careful navigation must not overshadow the priority of addressing the people’s concerns—especially regarding land rights, compensation, and agricultural livelihoods.
In essence, the NC’s mandate is both a call to action and a warning. It carries immense responsibility to deliver on promises while being mindful of the long-term impact of decisions. The road ahead is fraught with challenges, and failure to meet the people’s expectations could result in disillusionment.
Views expressed in the article are the author’s own and do not necessarily represent the editorial stance of Kashmir Observer
- The author is a legal professional with extensive experience in human rights law, policy analysis, and advocacy
Follow this link to join our WhatsApp group: Join Now
Be Part of Quality Journalism |
Quality journalism takes a lot of time, money and hard work to produce and despite all the hardships we still do it. Our reporters and editors are working overtime in Kashmir and beyond to cover what you care about, break big stories, and expose injustices that can change lives. Today more people are reading Kashmir Observer than ever, but only a handful are paying while advertising revenues are falling fast. |
| ACT NOW |
| MONTHLY | Rs 100 |  |
| YEARLY | Rs 1000 | |
| LIFETIME | Rs 10000 | |
