Land Law Reform Proposal: Bangladesh Context

Land Law Reform Proposal: Bangladesh

Context

Chapter One

Introductory Chapter1.1 Nature & Scope of the Study

1.2 Objectives of the Study

1.3 Study Methodology

1.4 Importance of the Study

1.5 Limitations of the Study

1.6 Significance of the Study

1.7 Summary of the Chapter

Chapter Two

Historical Background Regarding Land Reforms inBangladesh

2.1 Sher Shas Reforms

2.2 Mogul Period:Todar Mall’s System

2.3 Grant of Dewani

2.4 Todar Mall System Continued

2.5 Quinquennial Settlement1

2.6 Lord Cornwallis : Pitt’s India Act

2.7 Decennial Settlement

2.8 Permanent Settlement

2.9 Floud Commission

2.10East Bengal State Acquisition and Tenancy Act,1951

2.11Subsequent Reforms

2.12Summary of the Chapter

Chapter Three

Historical Evolution of Land Law in the Contextof Land Administration of Bangladesh (Before

British)

3.1 Bengal Regulation Act,1793

(a) History of Permanent Settlement Regulations

(b) The Positions of Zamidars Before Permanent Settlement

(c) Position of Zamidar After Permanent Settlement

3.2 Bengal Allusion and Dilution Regulation,1825

(a) Alluvion Law

(b) Diluvion Law

(c) Analysis

(d) Problems

3.3 Bengal PatniTaluk Regulation,1819

2

(a) Object and Policy of Regulation

(b) Origin of PatniTaluk

(c) Nature of PatniTaluk

3.4 Summary of the Chapter

Chapter Four

The Land Law Reform Proposal in Bangladesh4.1 Salient Features of the Land Reforms Ordinance, 1984

4.2 The Term Bargadar What Actually Mean

4.3 The Term Bargadar – Difference from the Term Tenants

4.4 An Analytical Discussion over Land Reforms Ordinance, 1984 4.5 The question of validity of the Land Reforms Ordinance, 1984

after coming 7th amendment judgement

4.6 Difference between the Rights and Liabilities of Raiyats and

Bargadars

4.7 Summary of the Chapter

Chapter Five

Concluding Chapter3

5.1 Findings

5.2 Recommendations

5.3 Conclusion

Bibliography

Chapter- One

Introductory Chapter

1.1 Introduction

Land Reforms measures taken by the government to change land

ownership and production relationships in land. A major step in

the direction of land reforms dates back to the formation of a

Commission called Bengal Land Reforms Commission in 1940, which

had Sir Francis Floud as the chairman. This Commission was a

broad-based one, and included a representative of the big

4

zamindars (landlords). The floud commission recommended abolition

of zamindaris, which meant abolition of all rent-receiving

interests above the tiller of the soil. In other words, the

concept of creating new land tenures at the will of zamindars,

and all other land tenures subject to intermediaries who had the

right to receive rents from subordinate land holdings, resulting

in extensive sub infeudation of land holdings, was abandoned. The

commission wanted abolishment of all interests existing between

the paramount power at the top i.e., the government and the men

actually behind the plough i.e, the actual cultivators. Moreover,

the commission took away the right to create subordinate

interests in the future. Its recommendation did not, however,

extend to sharecroppers (bargadars), who did not own the land

they cultivated, but were the real tillers of the soil. On the

basis of the above recommendations, laws were framed. But before

the draft legislation could be passed, the Partition of Bengal

took place in 1947.

In 1950, the East Bengal Legislative Assembly passed the east

bengal state acquisition and tenancy act, which received the

consent of the Governor General in 1951. Prior to this enactment,

the Rent Act X of 1859 and the bengal tenancy act of 1885

(amended twice, once in 1928 and again in 1938) contained some

measures defining the status and rights of the raiyats (the last

in the ladder of the land tenure system) vis-a-vis the landlords

at the top, and other tenure-holders or rent receiving interests

just above the raiyat or under the raiyat at the bottom. The

5

Floud Commission did not recommend any ceiling of khas land,

which could be retained by any individual landholder in his

direct possession. But the East Bengal State Acquisition and

Tenancy Act contained a specific provision to the effect that no

individual land holder (be he the zamindar or a tenure-holder or

a raiyat) could retain in his direct possession any land

exceeding 100 standard bighas or 13.5 ha.

The implementation of the scheme of state acquisition as

envisaged in East Bengal State Acquisition and Tenancy Act

involved a time taking process. After the act was passed, steps

were initiated for acquiring, in a summary procedure as laid down

in Chapter II of the act, the interests of proprietors of big

estates on the basis of collection papers available from the

concerned zamindars’ kacharies (offices). Similar action was

taken in respect of the court of wards estates. In this process,

443 big estates with a total annual income of Rs 47,427,207 were

acquired straightway. But the interests of subordinate tenure and

other rent-receivers under these estates remained unaffected.

The first hurdle in the implementation process came in the shape

of several civil suits in the courts of sub-judges by some

zamindars challenging the acquisition of their interests under

the act. All these cases were, however, decreed in favour of

government, both in the lower court and in the high court.

1.2 Object of the Study

6

Its main object is that analytical discussion Land Reforms

measures taken by the government to change land ownership and

production relationships in land. A major step in the direction

of land reforms dates back to the formation of a Commission

called Bengal Land Reforms Commission in 1940, which had Sir

Francis Floud as the chairman. This Commission was a broad-based

one, and included a representative of the big zamindars

(landlords).

1.3 Nature and Scope of the Study

The scope of this research includes the areas of Information

required to collect and analyze regarding the land reform in

Bangladesh. This entire report is focusing on the initiatives,

have been taken to its main object to discuss land reform in

Bangladesh.

1.4 Methodology of the Study

I have done the following works to prepare the given research:

I went to Library to collect some information about land

reform in Bangladesh which is so relevant. I take some book

on discussion relating land reform in Bangladesh.

7

Then from another day I have tried to collect Book and Law

journal relating to analytical discussion of land reform in

Bangladesh.

In several times I went to my teacher to get his advice to

ready this research paper and my honorable teacher helps me

to prepare the paper.

According to my teachers information I went to various web

site to search Information about the land reform in

Bangladesh which is so relevant.

Then from another day I have searched an Internet and have

found so many information relating to land reform in

Bangladesh.

I have checked have some important law books to get

information about the land reform in Bangladesh which is so

relevant. Finally I prepare my research from the book, Law

Journal and online.

I discuss with my fellow friends about the topics and it

helps me to adorn my topic.

1.5 Limitations of the Study

While conducting this research paper some limitations has found I

faced some barrier concerning information for instance. There is no

available book in the market regarding the topic. On the other hand,

our NUB library does not have well amount of books in this topic.

Moreover, there are some negligible problems to make this research

fruitful.

8

1.6 Significance of the Study

Research is important when conducted currently because it helps

us to understand and possible even solve existing or possible

problems in the world.

Many of the norms of research promote a variety of other

important moral and social values such as social

responsibilities, global climate change, human rights and animal

welfare, compliance with the law and health and also safety. I

will try to describe the conditions and consequences of this

matter as per as possible for me and I hope this research will

contain importance for the government in our country as well as

judicial activities.

1.7 Summary of the Chapter

In Chapter one, discussion Land Reforms measures taken by the

government to change land ownership and production relationships in

land. A major step in the direction of land reforms dates back to

the formation of a Commission called Bengal Land Reforms Commission

in 1940, which had Sir Francis Floud as the chairman. This

Commission was a broad-based one, and included a representative of

the big zamindars (landlords).

In 1950, the East Bengal Legislative Assembly passed the east

bengal state acquisition and tenancy act, which received the

consent of the Governor General in 1951. Prior to this enactment,

9

the Rent Act X of 1859 and the bengal tenancy act of 1885

(amended twice, once in 1928 and again in 1938) contained some

measures defining the status and rights of the raiyats (the last

in the ladder of the land tenure system) vis-a-vis the landlords

at the top, and other tenure-holders or rent receiving interests

just above the raiyat or under the raiyat at the bottom. The

Floud Commission did not recommend any ceiling of khas land,

which could be retained by any individual landholder in his

direct possession. But the East Bengal State Acquisition and

Tenancy Act contained a specific provision to the effect that no

individual land holder (be he the zamindar or a tenure-holder or

a raiyat) could retain in his direct possession any land

exceeding 100 standard bighas or 13.5 ha.

It's includes the areas of Information required to collect and

analyze regarding the land reform in Bangladesh. This entire

report is focusing on the initiatives, have been taken to its

main object to discuss land reform in Bangladesh.

Chapter Two

Historical Background Regarding Land Reforms in

Bangladesh 10

In order to have an in-depth understanding of the present system

of land management and land administration in Bangladesh, the

historical background of the land tenure system in the entire

territory of Bengal (now comprising independent Bangladesh and the

Indian province of west Bengal) must be taken into account.

Under the Hindu rulers in ancient India land revenue was payable

in kind and varied from one-eighth to one-sixth of the produce

of the land. Though the sixth became a traditional share, the

growing requirements of the state in a perpetual condition of

warfare often pushed the state share to one-quarter. The Muslim

rulers subsequently adopted the indigenous system, but

generally collected the state's share of the produce in cash, the

produce being valued at the current market rate.

2.1 Sher Shas: ReformsSher Shas (1540-1545) reformed the land revenue system by

introducing measurement of the lands and a regular system of

assessment and collection. The first systematic attempt to

substitute cash for produce payments was made in the reign or

Akbar with the help of his Minister, Todar Mall (1571-1582). One

third of the average gross produce was adopted as the basis of

assessment and the rates were fixed by calculating the price of

staple food crops on an average of the previous 19 years. Todar

Mall was a great financier and an eminent revenue authority and

his name had come down to posterity as a guarantee for sound

assessment.

11

2.2 Moghul Period: Todar Mall's SystemThe first step towards effecting an accurate assessment was a

comprehensive survey of land and the establishment of one uniform

standard of measurement. Todar Mall's settlement was made with

the raiyats (tenants) direct for a term of 10 years. The revenue

system named after him must have proved beneficial to the raiyats

and just to the state: it lasted without material variation for

more than a century, during which time cultivation flourished

and the tenant rayat attained a high degree of prosperity. Under

Todar Mall's assessment, the revenue of the Suba of Bengal which

was divided into 19 Sircars or districts, each district being

sub-divided into a number of parganas, amounted to Rs. 106.93

lakhs. In 1658 Shah Shuja, then Moghul Governor of Bengal,

made a new assessment and increased the land revenue to Rs.

131.15 lakhs. An important administrative development during the

time of Akber was the emergence of the Dewan as the head of the

financial administration. The power of the Dewan was at its

highest when Murshid Kuli Khan became the Dewan of Bengal, Bihar

and Orissa in 1701. He introduced further administrative

innovations and increased the land revenue of Bengal, Bihar and

Orissa to Rs. 142 lakes in 1722. By 1765, when the British

acquired the Dewani or financial administration of these

provinces, the nominal revenue had risen to Rs. 312 lakhs,

though it is doubtful whether so large a sum was ever actually

realized. A substantial part of it was abwabs imposed by the

12

Nawab in addiction to the revenue assessment. Alivardi Khan

imposed further 'abwas' including the Mahratta Chauth,

The last phase in the revenue administration of the Moghuls was

the excessive growth of the system of farming Aurangzeb. As the

authority of the Emperor decreased, the local Governors of Bengal

of Bengal became more independent of the court of Delhi. They

also became careless about the details of administration and the

official organization for the control of land revenue

disappeared. The farmers became masters of the situation and

were allowed, on payment of the stipulated sum, to appropriate

the revenue for their own use and profit and to do as they liked

with the tenants. They were not slow to take advantage of the

weakness of a tottering central administration and fortify

their position until they developed into great landlords whose

pretensions gradually extended to the ownership of the soil.

2.3 Grant of DewaniThe decline of the Moghul Empire Tgan to change Bengal's history

and on 12 August 1765, the East India Company secured from

Emperor Shah Alam1 the official grant of the Dewani of Bengal,

Bihar and Orissa. This provided the foundation of British

revenue jurisdiction in the provinces. Under the terms of the

grant, the East India Company was to pay an annual sum of

1http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History, accessed on 22/12/14

13

Rs. 26 lakhs to the Moghul Emperor and to appropriate to itself

all the excess over the this sum in the collection of the total

land revenue, after paying the expenses of the establishment.

2.4 Todar Mall's System ContinuedTodar Mall's system of assessment, as revised in 1685 and

1750, was in force when the British assumed control of the

revenues of Bengal. In theory the assessment was based on a

measurement of the cultivated area and classification of soil.

But no survey was carried out in Bengal and other outlying

province and hill areas were let out in farms to anvils or

revenue collectors, who were apparently left to make their own

arrangements regarding assessment and collections. At first no

attempt was made by British officers to conduct the

administration and for some time no interference with the native

officials was contemplated. No change was made in the existing

system till 1769 when supervisors were appointed to existing

superintend the collection of revenue by the Bengali officers

of the former regime. In 1772 the former supervisors were

converted into collectors of revenue in districts.

2.5 Quinquennial SettlementVery shortly afterwards, Warren Hastings was appointed

Governor-General and he at once embarked on measures for

transforming the Company's merchants and writers into executive

14

officers. A Committee of Circuits was appointed with

instructions to tour the province and make settlement of

estates with farmers offering the highest bid for five years.

This was known as the quinquennial settlement. It was believed

that the locals of the country were better informed about the

value of the lands than their rulers and few would engage in a

payment which they could not find the means to discharge.

However, the new system proved an absolute failure. The arrears

accumulated and decreasing collection of revenue so alarmed the

authorities in India and the Company Directors in the UK that

steps had to be taken to evolve a more satisfactory system.

2.6 Lord Cornwallis: Pitt's India ActIn 1777 annual settlements were tried for several years. Ills

evils of such settlements were obvious and in 1784 Pitt's India

Act was passed, which required the Government of India to

enquire into the condition of landlords and establish Permanent

rules for the collection of revenue founded on the local laws

and usages of the country. In 1786, Lord Cornwallis came to India

as Governor-General with a letter of instruction from the East

India Company. Directors in which they considered "a permanent

settlement of a reasonable and fair revenue to be the best, for

the payment of which the hereditary tenure of the possession is

to be the only necessary security". With him came Mr.

(afterwards Sir) John Shore, newly appointed to the Board of

Revenue. Cornwallis and Shore instituted the most careful and

15

elaborate enquiries regarding the past and current condition of

land tenures in Bengal, the results of which are embodied in

shore's famous minutes of 1788 and 1789.

Then followed long controversies regarding the status of the

Zamindars and an appropriate method of land revenue settlement.

2.7 Decennial SettlementThe Company Directors instructed that assessment should be for

a period of 10 years in the first instance. Accordingly, in

1790, settlement was made for this period with the actual

collectors of rent of all denominations, i.e. Zamindars,

independent Talukdars and22 the lessees, with the promise of

its conversion into permanent settlement provided that such

permanent settlement should meet with the approbation of the

Company Directors. This approbation was embodied in their

letter of 29 August 1792. Accordingly, Regulation 1 of 1793 was

promulgated by the Governor-General declaring that the revenue

assessed upon the lands of each estate had been made

unalterable and fixed forever. The Zamindars were declared to

be the proprietors of the soil". (See Appendix 1 for a gist of

the Articles of the Regulation).

2.8 Permanent SettlementAt the same time the Zamindars were made liable to have their

estates sold for arrears of revenue if this was not paid by

sunset on the latest date fixed for each instalment; no excuse

16

such as drought or famine was to be accepted for non-payment.

This was known as the Sunset Law. The main object of the East

India Company in introducing permanent settlement was to

safeguard the punctual receipt of land revenue, though it

recognized that fixing of the land revenue forever would in time

lead to loss of revenue to the state.

Though permanent settlement was made in 1793, the controversy for

and against it continued. In 1812, the Select Committee

appointed by the British Parliament submitted the famous Filth

Report. In 1836, a second Select Committee set up by the House

01' COMlllOllsCllllb to Conclusion that the intention of Lord

Cornwallis did Hot comes true. By the middle of the nineteenth

century there was a revulsion against its working which

manifested itself in widespread agrarian discontent. This

resulted in the enactment of the first tenancy law, the Rent

Act X of 1859, which defined an occupancy raiya't and Jaid down

relations between landlord and tenant. In 1885 a more

Comprehensive tenancy law, the oft-quoted Bengal Tenancy Act of

1885, defined the rights of the raiyats. The Act was amended

substantially in 1928 and again 1111938.

As a result of these amendments, raiyats who held 90 percent of

the cultivated lands acquired heritable occupancy rights along

with rights of sub-letting and transfer.

2.9 Floud Commission, 1938

17

The above legislation, however, failed to alleviate the

conditions of the raiyats. Popular feeling continued against

the permanent settlement and asserted itself after the grant

of provincial autonomy in 1935. The permanent settlement by

which the land revenue was fixed forever was found to be

incompatible with the land growing demands made by the provincial

government for nation-building programmes. A Land Revenue

Commission was, therefore, appointed in 1938 under the

chairmanship of Sir Francis Flood. The Commission submitted its

report on 21 March 1940 and observed that the permanent

settlement was no longer suitable to the conditions of the

time. It recommended the abolition of all rent-receiving

interests in order to bring all the actual cultivators directly

under the government. This recommendation was supported by the

Bengal Administrative Enquiry Committee of 1944.

2.10 East Bengal State Acquisition and Tenancy

Act, 1951In 1947 the Bengal State Acquisition and Tenancy Bill was

introduced in the provincial legislature of undivided Bengal,

but was not passed because of the partition of the country.

After the partition the East Bengal Legislative Assembly in

1950 and assented to by the Governor-General on 19 May 1951.

18

The main provisions of this law are noted below:

a) All rent-receiving interests from those of Zamindars,Talukdars and other intermediary tothose just above the actualtillers of the soil (other than share-croppers) wereabolished. .b) Further subletting of lands by the ground tenants wasprohibited;c) A ceiling on holding of lands was imposed, beyond which excesslands would vest in thegovernment.d) Compensation in cash or 40-year's bonds will be paid after dueassessment under thelaw.e) All hats and bazaars, ferries and fisheries stood vested inthe Government on payment of due compensation there for.

2.11 Subsequent ReformsThe above law is considered as a milestone in the history of

legislative enactments in the field of land tenure system in

territories now included in Bangladesh. However, after its

independence, there have been a number of amendments in this

epoch-making law at different stages to meet the needs of time.

The most significant one was the State Acquisition and Tenancy

(Third Amendment) order, 1972. By this amendment, raiyats

having 25 bighas of land or less per family were each exempted

from paying any rent. Of course, this provision was done away

with later by the introduction of Land Development Tax in place

of rent and cases payable by all tenants irrespective of the

size of their land holdings (Land Development Tax, ordinance,

19

1976). But the exemption from paying rent for lands held by

any tenant family up to 25 big has been restored after the

Ruling Democratic Government was voted to power in 1991.2

2.12 Summary of the ChapterIn Chapter Two, I discuss about the historical background of Land

Reforms in Bangladesh from Moghul period to British and also Sher

Sha reform about land and Todra Mall system of land, Permanent

settlement , Pitt's India Act and which way the subsequent reform

are comes in Bangladesh.

Todar Mall's settlement was made with the raiyats (tenants) direct

for a term of 10 years. The revenue system named after him must

have proved beneficial to the raiyats and just to the state. An

important administrative development during the time of Akbar was

the emergence of the Dewan as the head of the financial

administration.

In quinquennial settlement a Committee of Circuits was

appointed with instructions to tour the province and make

settlement of estates with farmers offering the highest bid

for five years. This was known as the quinquennial settlement.

Pitt's India Act was passed, which required the Government of

India toenquire into the condition of landlords and establish

2T. Hussaih, Land Rights in Bangladesh, Shams Publication, Dhaka, 1st Edition, 1995 at

pp. 13-19

20

Permanent rules for the collection of revenue founded on the

local laws and usages of the country.

Accordingly, in 1790, settlement was made for this period with

the actual collectors of rent of all denominations, i.e.

Zamindars, independent Talukdars and22 the lessees, with the

promise of its conversion into permanent settlement provided

that such permanent settlement should meet with the

approbation of the Company Directors in decennial settlement.

Permanent settlement was to safeguard the punctual receipt of

land revenue, though it recognized that fixing of the land

revenue forever would in time lead to loss of revenue to the

state.

Though permanent settlement was made in 1793, the controversy for

and against it continued.

21

Chapter Three

Historical Evolution of Land Law in the Contextof Land Administration of Bangladesh (Before

British)

3.1 Bengal Regulation Act, 1793(a) History of Permanent Settlement Regulations

The Permanent Settlement also known as the Permanent Settlement

of Bengal (Bengali: Chirosthayi Bandobasto was an agreement

between the East India Company and Bengali landlords to fix

revenues to be raised from land, with far-reaching consequences

for both agricultural methods and productivity in the entire

Empire and the political realities of the Indian countryside. It

was concluded in 1793, by the Company administration headed by

Charles, Earl Cornwallis. It formed one part of a larger body of

legislation enacted known as the Cornwallis Code. The other two

systems prevalent in India were The Ryotwari System and The

Mahalwari System.

This Act was passed on 1793 and was proposed by Lord Corwallis to

earn a minimum revenue for East India Company. Lord Cornwallis

concluded the Permanent Settlement Act of 1793. Permanent

Settlement was a grand contract between the East India Company

22

and the Landholders of Bengal (Zamindars and independent

Talukdars of all designations). Under this act, the landholders

and Zamindars were admitted as the absolute owners of landed

property to the colonial state system. Not only those, the

Zamindars and landholders were allowed to hold their proprietary

right at a rate that never changed. Under this contract of

Permanent Settlement, the Government could not enhance the

revenue demands on Zamindars.

Earlier, zamindars of Bengal, Bihar and Orissa had officials for

collecting revenue on behalf of the Mughal emperor and his

representative or Diwan in Bengal. The Diwan would in turn

supervise on them so that there is no less or excessive pressure

for earning revenue. East India Company was able to win over

Diwani or the right to rule Bengal following the victory in

Battle of Buxar in 1764. The Company thus had the responsibility

of ruling but it lacked the trained administrator, especially

with the persons who knew local tradition and custom. As a result

the landlords and Zamindars had to deposit the revenue to the

corrupted officials of East India Company. As a consequence the

revenue had no certain amount. There was constant pressure to

exceed the amount as well as the revenue was never used for the

social welfare.

The devastating famine of Bengal was caused mainly due to lack of

insight of the officials of East India Company. The officials of

Company in Calcutta thus understood the importance of supervising

23

of the revenue earning but the question of having incentives over

the tax was ignored. Thereby the Governor General Warren Hastings

introduced a system of five-yearly inspections and collecting the

revenue.

The bad side of this system was the appointed tax farmers

absconded with as much money as they could earn within this five

years of period. The consequences were disastrous and the

Parliament came to know about the corruption of East India

Company. In 1784 British Prime Minister Pitt the Younger tried to

alter the Calcutta Administration with Pitt`s India Act and in

the year 1786 lord Charles Cornwallis was sent out to India to

supervise the alteration.

In 1786 the Court of Directors of East India Company first

proposed The Permanent Settlement Act for Bengal. The act was

proposed as they were acting against the policy of attempt to

increase the taxation of Zamindars. Between 1786 and 1790 the

Governor General Lord Cornwallis and Sir John Shore (the later

Governor General himself) debated over whether or not to

introduce Permanent settlement Act in Bengal. Shore`s point of

argument was that the native Zamindars could not trust the

permanent Settlement and it would take a long time for them to

realize the genuineness of this act. But Cornwallis believed that

they would immediately accept Permanent Settlement Act and start

investing in improving their land. In 1790 the Court of Directors

24

passed a ten-year (Decennial) Settlement Act to the zamindars,34

which was later changed to Permanent Settlement Act on 1793.

By Permanent Settlement act the security of tenure of the lands

were guaranteed to the landlords and the process of paying tax

was clear, In short, the former landholders and revenue

intermediaries were benefited as their proprietorship on lands

they held was assured. This also ensured the minimization of the

fortune made on revenues earned by the Company officials.

Smallholders were not allowed to sell their lands though their

new landlords had no chance to deprive them.

The Permanent Settlement Act brought the improvement of the lands

by the landowners as they took care of drainage and irrigation.

Construction of roads and bridges were encouraged which were

lacking in the state of Bengal. As the land revenue got fixed

zamindars could securely invest the rest of the money to increase

their income without the fear of tax increment. Cornwallis made

the motivation of the company clear by stating "when the demand

of government is fixed, an opportunity is afforded to the

landholder of increasing his profits, by the improvement of his

lands." The earning of company was thus assured as there were no

shortage in the revenues due to defaulting Zamindars, who fell

into debts as they could not fix their budged due to fluctuation

of revenue.3 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Permanent_Settlement, accessed on 15/12/144 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Permanent_Settlement, accessed on 18/12/14

25

The Permanent Settlement Act had definitely some objectives in

view, which can be summarized as :

Earning revenue could be made certain.

Ensuring a minimum amount of revenue

The system needed less supervision, so officials could be

engaged in other spheres of administration

Forging an alliance between Zamindar class and British

Colonial rulers.

The goals were achieved largely though not entirely. The

immediate consequence of Permanent Settlement act was sudden as

well as dramatic but there were also results, which were

apparently not apprehended before. The Government tax demand was

inflexible and the collectors of East India Company refused to

make any adjustment during the time of drought, flood or other

natural calamity. This was the drawback of the Permanent

Settlement Act, that caused many Zamindars to fall into arrears.

The Company`s policy was to put the land in auction, whose taxes

are not fulfilled. This created a new market for the land. Many

Indian officials of East India Company purchased this land. Thus

a new class of bureaucrats was created who purchased lands those

were under assessed and profitable. This led to two

possibilities- one, to manipulate the system to bring to sale the

lands they wanted specifically and the other was that the

officials could be purchased by bribing them in order to get

possession of a certain land. Thus this bureaucrats class became

26

rich by unfair means. Thus, the Permanent Settlement Act led to

commercialization of land, which did not exist in Bengal before.

This in consequence created a change in social background. Those

who were "lineages and local chiefs" turned to "under civil

servants and their descendants, and to merchants and bankers."

The new landlord class was generated who had no connection with

their lands but managed the property through the managers.

There was some obvious influence of Permanent Settlement Act. The

company hoped that Zamindar class would be their revenue

generating machine as well as they would serve as intermediaries

for the political aspect of their rule and would protect British

Government in all their interests. However, in course of time it

acted both ways. Zamindars were the natural protectors of the

British rulers but when the British policy changed during mid -

nineteenth century that interfered with social reform, some

Zamindars put themselves in opposition.

The agreement of permanent Settlement Act only included the

revenue earning but there was no mention of the use of the land.

Thus to earn more money from the land, the Company officials and

Zamindars insisted on planting Indigo and cotton rather than

wheat and rice. This was the cause of many worst famines of the

Bengal. Another disadvantage was creation of absentee Zamindar

class who did not pay attention in the improvement of land.

Thus, by Permanent Settlement Act of 1793, Zamindar class became

more powerful than they were in the Mughal period.

27

(b) The Positions of Zamidars before Permanent Settlement

However, Cornwallis and Shore agreed to send their respective

views and other related documents to the court of directors for a

final decision about the issue. They also agreed that in the

meantime the government should form a settlement for a term of

ten years from 1790 with a notice to the landholders that if the

court of directors gave direction in favour of permanent

settlement, the decennial settlement would be declared permanent

immediately. The court of directors, after studying all the

minutes from all members of the council, gave its opinion in

favour of permanent settlement. On 23 March 1793, Lord Cornwallis

proclaimed that "at the expiration of the terms of the

(decennial) settlement, no alteration would be made in the

assessment which (zamidnars had) respectively engaged to pay, but

that they, and their heirs and lawful successors, would be

allowed to hold their estates at such assessment for ever"

(Proclamation Article III, Section 4, Regulation 1, 1793).

Zamindars' responses The Cornwallis administration expected,

possibly with valid grounds, that the new system would be

enthusiastically received by the zamindars as an unprecedented

privilege, for it had created private property in land which

never existed before and that the newly created landed property

was vested in the zamindars free of cost. Most importantly,

zamindars got the very unique privilege of paying government

revenue at a fixed rate forever, a decision which was certainly a

28

sacrifice for government in fiscal terms. Obviously, the

government thought that the zamindars, as great beneficiaries,

would respond to the settlement enthusiastically and with thanks

and gratitude to the good governance of the British. But to the

utter dismay of the government, the zamindars were seen to have

expressed dissatisfaction and disgust to the permanent

settlement. Many disgruntled zamindars even went to the extent of

rejecting the settlement and some offered open resistance.

There were many valid reasons why the zamindars were not happy

about the terms of the permanent settlement. The revenue

assessment on individual zamindars was made on a crude estimation

based on the average actual collection of rents for the preceding

ten years. Such an unsound method of assessment could lead to

very small incidence of revenue demand on some, and very heavy on

others. The heavily assessed estates were bound to fall in

chronic revenue arrears and consequently be exposed to public

sale and annihilation.

The government's firm declaration that no remission of revenue

would be allowed in the future "on account of drought,

inundation, encroachments and depredation of rivers, death or

flight of raiyats" was looked at by zamindars as utterly

unrealistic. To them, the most impractical condition imposed was

the punctual payment of revenue failing which the lands of the

zamindars were to be sold in public auction for realising the

arrears. In an agrarian economy based on erratic monsoon rains,

29

occasional crop failures and consequently revenue arrears were

inevitable.

They argued forcefully that if the authorities were unable to

make monsoon rains occur absolutely regularly and punctually then

how could they insist on land revenue payers to pay their dues

absolutely regularly and punctually?

The concerned zamindars, while arguing with the settlement

people, invoked the great tradition under which landholders

always got moukuf (remission) of public revenue whenever crops

failed due to natural causes. Rasad (progressive increase) of

revenue for three years from 1790 was another cause of complaint

on the part of the zamindars. The rasad policy was treated by

zamindars as highly arbitrary and unacceptable, because the

increase was based on pre-supposition that the resources of the

estates would increase. Such an assumption was highly

presumptuous and irrational.

Another area of zamindar's complaint was the taluk policy. Under

the rules of the permanent settlement all taluks hitherto paying

revenue through the zamindars were to be separated from them and

treat such separated estates as independent zamindaris. All large

zamindaris had numerous such taluks under their control and these

were separated from them without compensation. Consequent upon

the separation of taluks many zamindaris, which had hitherto

created taluks for management or other reasons, were reduced in

size and many of them even got extinct practically. For

30

zamindars, another irritating law was the so-called patta

Regulation (Regulation VIII 1793) which required the zamindars to

issue pattas to raiyats stating terms and conditions of bandobast

(settlement) and strictly prohibiting them from collecting any

abwab or imposition over and above the stipulated amount of rent.

The zamindars looked at it as a naked encroachment into what was

claimed to be the internal affairs of the zamindari management

and control.

The general unrest and commotion among zamindars, large-scale

transfer of lands under the operation of the revenue sale law,

declining trend of government revenue, failure of the judiciary

to clear up the mounting piles of revenue suits, deteriorating

law and order situation, and all other accompanying factors, were

disquieting enough for the government. It was strongly felt that

the trend must be reversed before the development went beyond

control. The authorities could content themselves that though the

rules of the permanent settlement had considerably disturbed the

traditional social and economic structures of the old landed

aristocracy, the new regime had conversely been able to attract

support from assorted social elements, such as, emancipated

talukdars, jotedars, lightly assessed landholders, new landlords,

emergent banians, Anglo-Indian mercantile interests and so on.

But socially, they were not yet respectable and powerful enough

to lead the society in favour of the government at times of a

crisis.

31

The administration of Lord Wellesley (1797-1805), which was

committed to empire building, noticed the post-permanent

settlement development with grave concern. Hundreds of zamindaris

were put to auction sales every month; government's revenue

collection became as irregular and uncertain as before 1793; the

administrative cost rose; revenue income declined; law and order

in the country deteriorated. The dismembered zamindars, shorn of

their zamindaris and princely image, more often than not put up

quite effective resistance to successful bidders who came to take

possession of their lots purchased at auctions.

Such a scene cannot comfort a government at war and a home

government looking forward to a regular flow of remittance after

the new system. Wellesley resolved to conciliate the zamindar

class by bringing some amendments to the basic rules of the

permanent settlement. The result was the enactment of Regulation

VII of 1799, commonly known as haftam or seventh, which armed the

zamindars with despotic powers over their defaulting raiyats. The

zamindars could now distrait their crops, cattle and other

properties and sell them, in the name of recovering arrears,

without any judicial intermediation. They, as absolute

proprietors, could summon the defaulting raiyats to their

katcharis and keep them confined in fetters until the arrears

were paid. They could impose community fines on the whole village

if any of the defaulting raiyats ran away to safety with his

family and property. They could enhance rent without any regard

to pargana customs and usages. In short, the haftam had negated

32

all customary rights that the raiyats had been enjoying

traditionally and reduced them to mere tenants-at-will.

(c) Position of Zamidar after Permanent Settlement

The crisis of the zamindari power and control that is noted

immediately after the system was put to operation was soon

followed by a spell of stability, and even of relative prosperity

of the zamindar class. The summary powers provided by a series of

enactments (Regulation XXXV of 1795, Regulation VII of 1799,

Regulation V of 1812 and Regulation VIII of 1819) enabled the

zamindars to enhance rent and collect it expeditiously. The

public sale of zamindari land due to revenue arrears thus became

a rare phenomenon from 1820. The opening of the country to free

trade from 1813 led to an ever larger volume of export of primary

products with its positive effects on zamindari income.

Population growth and consequent extension of agriculture,

introduction of commercial crops and rising trend in prices had

their happy effects on the zamindari economy.

Unfortunately, the prosperity of the zamindar class did not lead

to a corresponding prosperity of the peasantry (raiyats). The

peasant surpluses were systematically extracted by the zamindars

and intermediate interests in the form of enhanced rent and

myriad impositions, such as, abwabs, tuhuri, dasturi, chandas,

bhet, nazrana, begar, selami, etc. Peasants continued to produce

subsistence plus rent only. With the integration of the country

with the global capitalist economy from the early nineteenth

33

century, the subsistence economy in the rural society came under

severe strains. A series of peasant uprisings in most parts of

Bengal, especially in eastern Bengal,from the late 1850s was the

most direct manifestation of the estranged relationship between

the zamindars and raiyats. The crisis was triggered off by the

peasant disturbances in the Santal Pargana first (1855) and then

in the indigo districts (1859-61). The indigo resistance movement

continued from 1858 to 1860.

The peasant resistance movements took an alarming turn in the

1870s and early 1880s when the peasants in several parts of

eastern Bengal made jotes (alliances) among themselves to assert

their rights in land and minimise extraction of surpluses by

zamindars. The most remarkable of the peasant uprisings in this

period were the Tushkhali (in Bakerganj) peasant movement (1872-

75), pabna peasant uprising (1873), chhagalnaiya (Noakhali)

peasant movement (1874), mymensingh tribal peasant movement

(1874-1882), munshiganj (Dhaka) peasant movement (1880-81) and

mehendiganj (Bakerganj) uprising (1880-81). The Faraizis (a

Muslim reformist sect) took up the peasants' cause and the

faraizi movement established extensive network across the

country, particularly in south Bengal, against the zamindari

control. A common demand of all these peasant jotes was the

restoration of raiyati rights in land.

34

These uprisings indicate for certain the gradual erosion of the

permanent settlement. The proprietary classes had lost their

grips on the raiyats who were now asserting their rights in land.

Zamindars, being unable to contain the rebellious raiyats, asked

for government help to discipline the recalcitrant raiyats and

government did send police, and even armed forces where

necessary, to quell the disturbances. Most government reports on

the peasant movements pointed to the weakening state of the

zamindar class, particularly to its impoverished conditions. The

operation of the law of inheritance and consequent partition and

re-partition of estates, family feuds, litigation, absenteeism,

creation of intermediate tenures, untimely death of proprietors,

extravagance, and many other associated factors had eroded the

zamindar class structurally. On the other side, an affluent and

assertive agrarian middle class in the persons of madhyasvatvas

or intermediate tenureholders, jotedars, hawladars and other rich

peasants was emerging steadily since the first quarter of the

nineteenth century.

3.2 Bengal Allusion and Dilution Regulation, 1825

a) Alluvion Law

Alluvion describes the increase in the area of land due to

sediment, which is deposited by

a river. It signifies the gradual accretion of land or formation

of an island by imperceptible degrees. Alluvion differs from

35

avulsion in this: that the latter is sudden and perceptible. In

Bangladesh, rivers shifting the sands which lie in the bed of

those rivers, chars or small islands are often thrown up by

alluvion in the midst of the stream or near one of the banks and

large portion of land are carried away by an encroachment of the

river on one side which accessions of lands are at the same time

or in subsequent years gained by dereliction of the water on the

opposite side. Similar instances alluvion, encroachment and

dereliction also sometimes occur on the sea coast which borders

southern and eastern5 limits of Bengal.

Alluvion is defined as-Alluvion,a legal term which describes the

increase in the area of land due to sediment(alluvium) which is

deposited by a river. This changes the size of a piece of land (a

process called accession and thus its value over time6.

b) Diluvion Law

The loss of land by the encroachment of water is called diluvion.

It takes place due to the gradual, imperceptible and erosion or

submersion or washing away of the surface soil by a river or the

sea.7

c) Analysis

5 Dr Mohammad Towhidul Islam, Lectures on Land Law,1st Edition,2013,at p.426 http://www.khyberpakhtunkhwa.gov.pk/Gov/Details.php?id=3 accessed on 05/02/15.7Dr.L.Kabir, Land Laws of Bangladesh, 6th Edition, 2010, at p.66

36

In the state acquisition and tenancy act 1950, a specific

provision regarding the law of accretion, which was so long being

regulated by Regulation XI of 1825, was made in section 87. The

provisions relating to abatement of rent for the diluviated land

and subsistence of tenant’s right to such land, similar to those

of section 86A of the Bengal Tenancy Act, were incorporated in

section 86 of the Act of 1950. On 4 August 1972, President’s

Order No. 135 was promulgated to provide that in case of diluvion

the rent of the holding shall be abated and the tenant’s right of

ownership shall be extinguished and the land on reappearance

shall vest in the government, except the land in respect of which

the tenant’s right to repossession was finally recognised by the

court or competent authority before in situ, which was declared

to have been founded on universal law and justice, and enjoyed

the sanction of positive law from 1825, was abrogated. All char

lands, whether re-formation in situ or new accretion, were

declared to be khas lands.

According to section 86 of the state acquisition and tenancy act

1950

(1)If the lands of a holding or a portion of such lands are lost

by diluvion, the rent or the land development tax of holding

shall, on application or intimation made by the tenant in the

prescribed form to the Revenue-officer, be abated by such amount

as may be considered by the Revenue-officer to be fair and

equitable in accordance with the rules made in this behalf by the

37

Government and the act of such loss by diluvion shall be recorded

in accordance with such rules, which shall be treated as proof of

title to the lands when the same re-appear in situ.

(2) Notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the

time being in force,the right, title and interest of the original

tenant or his successor-in-interest shall subsist in the lands of

a holding or portion thereof during the period of loss by

diluvion if such lands re-appear in situ within thirty years of

their loss.

(3) Notwithstanding the right, title and interest under sub-

section (2), the right to immediate possession of the lands re-

appeared shall first be exercised by the Collector, either on his

own motion or on an intimation made in writing by the tenant or

his successors-in-interest whose land was so lost or by any other

person.

(4) Notwithstanding anything contained elsewhere in this Act, the

Collector or the Revenue-officer shall, on taking possession of

such lands give public notice of the fact of his taking

possession in accordance with the rules made in this behalf by

the Government and cause a survey to be made of the lands so re-

appeared and prepare maps thereof.

(5) The Collector shall, within 45 days of the completion of

survey and preparation of map under sub-section (4), allot to the

tenant whose land was solost by diluvion or, as the case may be,

to his successors-in-interest such quantity of land which,

38

together with the land already held by him or his successors-in-

interest, shall not exceed sixty standard bighas and the excess

land of the tenant or his successors-in-interest, if any, after

the allotment shall vest in and be at the disposal of the

Government.

(6) The lands allotted under sub-section (5) shall be free of

salami but shall be subject to the condition that the tenant or

his successors-in-interest shall be liable to pay such fair and

equitable rent and land development tax as may be determined by

the Revenue-officer.

(7) The provision of this section shall not apply to cases of re-

appearance of land caused or accelerated by any artificial or

mechanical process as a result of development works undertaken

bythe Government or any authority empowered or authorized by or

under any law to undertake such development works. Bar on suits,

etc, for certain period

According to section 86A of the state acquisition and tenancy act

1950

No suit, prosecution or other legal proceeding shall lie in any

court in respect of anyland covered under section 86 during a

period of twelve months commencing on the dateof first giving

public notice under sub-section (4) of section 86 in order to

enable theCollector to complete the processes under that section.

39

Case concerning the right to land gained by alluvion or

dereliction of a river.

The court observed that the legal principles of law, equity and

good conscience are the law governing the rights of the parties

in this regard. The accretion to the land by alluvionor

dereliction of the river must be gradual for such a right to

exist for the owner of the estate next to the river.8

With the abolition of zamindari system in 1956, all small and

shallow rivers with the right of fisheries were acquired by the

government and consequently, chars formed in such small and

shallow rivers after 1956 would now be the property of the state.

The right of ownership in respect of chars formed in a large

navigable river or the sea, the bed of which is part of the

public domain, was treated in the Regulation in three different

situations.

The general law of ownership of accretion is that chars formed by

slow and imperceptible means in contiguity of a person’s land by

recess of a river or sea will be considered as increment to the

land of that person subject to payment of rent for the increased

land. Such a char cannot be claimed as re-formation in situ

because it arises out of the public navigable river, which is not

the property of any individual. When a char is thrown up in a

large navigable river or sea and is separated from the shore by a

channel, which is navigable by boat throughout the year, it will

8Samsuddin Rahman and others v. Bihari Das and others JT 1996 (6) 517 1996 SCALE (5)299

40

become the property of the state. But if the channel separating

the char from the shore becomes fordable (crossable on foot) at

any season of the year, such char will be considered as increment

to the land, which is most contiguous to the shore.

The regulation also provides another situation which in Roman Law

is called Avulsion. This is made as an exception to the general

law of accretion stated above. When a river by a sudden change of

its course breaks through an estate without any gradual

encroachment, or if the violence of the stream separates a piece

of land from one estate and joins into another estate without

destroying the identity, such land on being clearly recognised

will remain the property of the original owner.

This law of accretion as laid down in the Regulation continued in

force till a new provision was made in section 87 of the State

Acquisition and Tenancy Act 1950. Retaining the old provision of

the regulation regarding accretion, it provides for an exception

to the effect that the right to accretion will be limited to a

ceiling of total holding of land and such right will not extend

to accretions caused by any artificial or mechanical process as a

result of development work undertaken by the government. On 28

June 1972, the riparian owner’s right of accretion was also

abrogated by President’s Order No. 72 of 1972. The amended

section 87 of the State Acquisition and Tenancy Act 1950,

provides that accretions, whether from the recess of a river or

41

sea, shall not be considered as increment to any person’s holding

but shall vest absolutely in the government.

A concession has been made in favour of persons whose right to

accretion was finally recognised by a court or competent

authority in respect of chars that appeared before the date of

commencement of President’s Order No. 72 of 1972. The present

legal position is that all chars other than those re-formed in

situ within 30 years of diluvion are the property of the state,

which the government may settle in accordance with the rules. The

act of forcibly taking and keeping control of accreted land is

popularly known as char dakhal. An owner of diluviated land has

the unfettered right to repossess the land re-formed in situ

without any sanction from the government machinery. Similarly,

the riparian owner has the right to occupy the new char, which

slowly forms contiguous to his land. His only liability is to pay

rent or taxes. This indefeasible property right is said to have

been ‘founded on universal law and justice’ and codified in the

Regulation of 1825. This encourages zamindars and other

proprietors to grab by force any new char whenever and wherever

it appears claiming the same as diluviated land re-formed in situ

or

contiguous accretion as the situation demands. The rival

claimants are not slow in appearing with similar claims. The new

chars are fertile lands and would yield handsome salami and new

rents. The result invariably is the use of violence leading to

riot and killings over the possession of char lands.

42

Initial possession obviously gives an advantage in the field as

well as in law courts and muscle power almost rule the field

whatever might be the legal niceties in favour of one or the

other. Such a situation prevailing in the past led to the

enactment of the Bengal Alluvial Lands Act 1920, with the

objective ‘to prevent disputes concerning the possession of

certain lands in Bengal gained by alluvion or by dereliction of a

river on the sea’. It provided that if the collector is credibly

informed that a dispute likely to cause a breach of peace exists,

or likely to arise in regard to any alluvial land, which in his

opinion has recently formed, he may by an order in writing attach

such land, demarcate it with boundary pillars, appoint a receiver

to manage it, invite claims to such land, and after examination

send the list of claimants to the district judge for

determination of title of the claimants. On receipt of the order

of the district court, the collector shall put the person

certified to be entitled to the land in possession thereof. The

collector should also cause a survey of the char and prepare a

map, which will be presumed to be accurate until the contrary is

proved.

3.3 Summary of the Chapter

In Chapter Three I discuss on historical evolution of land law in

the context of land administration of Bangladesh (Before

British)the history of permanent settlement regulation, position of

43

zamidar before and after of permanent settlement and also Bengal

Allusion and Dilution Regulation,1825.

Permanent Settlement of Bengal (Bengali: Chirosthayi Bandobast)

was an agreement between the East India Company and Bengali

landlords to fix revenues to be raised from land, with far-

reaching consequences for both agricultural methods and

productivity in the entire Empire and the political realities of

the Indian countryside. The immediate consequence of Permanent

Settlement act was sudden as well as dramatic but there were also

results, which were apparently not apprehended before. The

Government tax demand was inflexible and the collectors of East

India Company refused to make any adjustment during the time of

drought, flood or other natural calamity.

The crisis of the zamindari power and control that is noted

immediately after the system was put to operation was soon

followed by a spell of stability, and even of relative prosperity

of the zamindar class. The public sale of zamindari land due to

revenue arrears thus became a rare phenomenon from 1820. The

opening of the country to free trade from 1813 led to an ever

larger volume of export of primary products with its positive

effects on zamindari income. With the abolition of zamindari

system in 1956, all small and shallow rivers with the right of

fisheries were acquired by the government and consequently, chars

formed in such small and shallow rivers after 1956 would now be

the property of the state. The right of ownership in respect of

44

chars formed in a large navigable river or the sea, the bed of

which is part of the public domain, was treated in the Regulation

in three different situations.

In aluvion and diluvion law the amendment is intended to make an

improvement of the situation in so far as initial responsibility

of taking over possession of the char land has been given to the

collector. After survey and preparation of map, the revenue

officer is given the the duty toallot the lands re formed in situ

to the person whose lands were diluvated. However success of this

measure depends upon the ability of the relevant government

machinery to conduct survey and prepare maps immediately after

appearance of the char and to take over possession of the same

notwithstanding political pressure.

45

Chapter Four

Land Reforms Ordinance 1984 and Problem

4.1 Salient Features of the Land Reforms Ordinance,

1984:The Land Reforms Ordinance, 1984 was enacted for the purpose of

reforming some rules which were depriving the real owner from

enjoying their absolute right over their land, or the helpless

poor people, for the development of the land management system,

for settlement of khas land for homestead and most importantly

for achievement of the rights of the bargadars. These are basic

characteristics of this ordinance which will now be discussed

under:

46

1. Limitation on Acquisition of Agricultural Land:

Earlier agricultural land was held by the king only. He was the

owner of all lands in the country. After that period lands were

held by the zaminders abundantly. Each of them had uncountable

lands. But as the lands when stay in one hand misuse of it and

oppression take place and the development becomes static

limitations were imposed in different statutes for holding

agricultural land.

First, the State Acquisition and Tenancy Act, 1950 provided

provision for limitation. Section90 of this act says about

limitation of transfer of holding in which it is stated that one

by himself and his family can purchase and acquire only three

hundred and seventy-five standard bighas and not more than that.

In section91 it is stated that anyone whose land has crossed the

ceiling by getting excess land devolved on him by inheritance,

can hold any of the portions he like and the rest land in excess

would be acquired by the govt.

Secondly, the provision of State Acquisition and Tenancy Act,

1950 was reformed in the Land Holding Limitation Order, 1972.

This act provides that no one can acquire, possess or purchase by

himself or by his family any land exceeding 100 standard bighas.

Finally, in Land Reforms Ordinance, 1984, section4 describes

about limitation which has been further reformed here as people

were increasing but the land was all the same like earlier so it

is provided here that,“No Malik or his family can own more than47

sixty standard bighas of agricultural land by transfer,

inheritance, gift or any other means.”

In every case if any one holds land in excess of the said

portion, that portion would vest absolutely in the government

free from all encumbrances. There is one exception in Land

Reforms Ordinance, 1984, if the excess land is owned by

inheritance, gift or will that means not voluntarily then when

acquiring it government would be liable to pay compensation and

not otherwise9.

2. No Benami Transaction:

Benami transactions were common before enacting Land Reforms

Ordinance, 1984. And many real owners and purchasers were

deprived of their rights in land as there was no proof of

transfer and the person transferred the land could not be

identified every time. So this provision was helpful for both the

land owner and purchaser.

Section 5 of the Land Reforms Ordinance, 1984 states that,” No

person shall purchase any immovable property for his own benefit

in the name of another person”, and thus prohibits any such act

like benami transaction ensures both the owner and transferee’s

right.

9 Bangladesh gazette, 1984.

48

Sudhanshu Kumar & Others vs. Barada Charan Sarkar & Others10 it

was held that, The onus of establishing benami is on the

defendants and that must be strictly established. The decision on

benami cannot on more suspicion but must rest on legal grounds

and legal testimony. It is also settled law that to ascertain the

true character of a transaction challenge as benami the vital

test is what is the source from whence the consideration came.

Settlement of Khas Land for Homestead:The khas lands of the govt. are settled for the poor who do not

have homesteads. In section 7 of the Land Reforms Ordinance,

1984, it is stated that,

“Where in the rural area any khas land fit for being used as

homestead is available, the government shall, in settling such

land, give preference to landless farmers and labourers, provided

that not more than five kathas of such land shall be allotted for

such purpose to any individual. And any land settled like this

shall be heritable but not transferable.”

Section 2(15) of the acquisition and tenancy act,1950 says that

khas land, in relation to any preson, includes any land lot out

tighter with any building necessary adjuncts thereto, otherwise

than is perpetuity.

In the case of

Sudhir Chandra Das VS Hatem Bepari11

10 6BLD11 Sudhir Chandra Das VS Hatem Bepari 8 BLD, Page 244

49

It was held that land with building on and let out is khas land.

5. No Evection etc…From Homested:

No person can be evicted from his homestead as per this law by

any process. Section 6 of the Land Reforms Ordinance, 1984 says

about this. It states that,

“Any land used as a homestead by its owner in the

rural area shall be exempted from all legal process, including

seizure, distress attachment or sale by any officer, court or any

other authority and the owner of such land shall not be divested

or dispossessed of the land or evicted there from by any means.

Provided that nothing in this section shall apply to the

acquisition of such homestead by any law.”

That means only by acquisition government can take any homestead

for public purpose by giving compensation.

In the leading case of Rahima Begum Vs Abdul Baten it was held

that “the change in the mean time of the law strands in the way

of the transfer getting the ”homestead ” restored under the

provision of ordinance No. XXVIII of 1976, under the new law

(land reforms Ordinance-1984).12

12 Rahima Begum Vs Abdul Baten

50

So it can be clearly understood that khas land of govt. can be

settled by this process for the landless people but this lands

are heritable but not transferable.

3. Rights of the Bargadars:

But the most important part of the Land Reforms Ordinance,

1984 is the chapter V of this ordinance which describes the

rights of the bargadars consisting of13 section 8 to section

19, as well as the biggest part of the ordinance which is

discussed hereunder.

4.2 The Term Bargadar What Actually Mean:

The Land Reforms Ordinance, 1984 defines the term bargadar

distinctly. No other statute has defined this term specifically.

According to section2(a) of this ordinance ‘bargadar’ means a

person who under the system generally known as adhi, barga or

bhag cultivates the land of another person on condition of

delivering a share of produce of such land to that person.

We can see from this provision that a bargadar is a person who

cultivates the land of any other person which is called barga

13https://www.academia.edu/9524318/ Bargadars_Right_from_the_perspective_of_Land_Reforms_Ordinance_1984, accessed on 05/02/15

51

land on condition of delivering a share of produce to that person

who is called malik or owner by a barga contract. So to

understand the term bargadar fully we have to understand the

other terms like barga contract, barga land, malik and owner etc.

this ordinance has also defined this terms. Section2 (b) defines

barga contract as a contract under which any land is cultivated

by a person as a bargadar, section2(c) says about barga land as

any land under cultivation of any person as bargadar. Section2

(f) states about Malik and 2(g) about owner. It is stated there

that a person or an organisation,body or authority holding

agricultural land is called Malik and the person from whom the

bargadar gets the land for cultivation under a barga contract.

So it is clear from the provisions that Malik is any person who

holds agricultural land, and owner is someone from whom a

bargadar gets the land for cultivation under barga contract.

Barga land is the land which is cultivated by the bargadar and

barga contract is such contract under which a bargadar cultivates

the land.

4.3 The Term Bargadar Difference from the Term Tenants:

According to the State Acquisition and Tenancy Act, 1950,

section2(27) defines the term ‘tenant’ as- tenant means a person

who holds land under another person and is, or but for a special

contract would be, liable to pay rent for that land to that

person. But as per this section a person who is generally known

as ‘adhi’, ‘barga’ or ‘bhag’ and cultivates the land of another

52

person on condition of delivering a share of the produce to that

person, is not a tenant, unless such person has been expressly

admitted to be a tenant by his landlord in any document by him or

executed in his favor and accepted by him, or, he has been or is

held by a Civil Court to be a tenant.

Section 2(9) of the State Acquisition and Tenancy Act, 1950

defines the term ‘cultivating raiyat’ or ‘cultivating under

raiyat’ which states that it means a raiyat or under-raiyat, as

the case may be, who holds land for cultivating it either by

himself or by the members of his family or by servants or by

bargadars or by or with the aid of hired laborers or with the aid

of partners. So this term is different from the term bargadar14.

Section82 (1) and 82(2)interprets the terms bonafide cultivator

and raiyat. Bonafide cultivator is a person who cultivates lands

by himself or by members of his family or, but or with the aid of

servants or bargadars, and also an agricultural laborer. Raiyat

means a person who, by virtue of section44 or otherwise, has

acquired a right to hold land directly under the Government

mainly for the purpose of cultivating it by himself or by his

members of his family or by, or with the aid of servants or

labourers or with the aid of partners or bargadars and includes

only the successors-in-interest of persons who have acquired such

a right. So from these two definitions we can understand that the

14 Obaidul Huq Chowdhury, TheState Acquisition and Tenancy Act, 1950(XXVIII of 1951), Dhaka Law

Reports, Fourth Edition, 2007.

53

term bargadar is also somewhat different from the terms bonafide

cultivator and raiyats.

4.4 An Analytical Dissection over Land Reforms

Ordinance, 1984:

Cultivation under barga contract and recognition of existing

bargadars is discussed in section 8 and section 9 of this

ordinance. They says,

“Subject to the other provisions of this ordinance, no person

shall allow another person to cultivate his land and no person

shall cultivate the land of another person on condition of

sharing the produce of such land between them unless they execute

a contract for such cultivation in such form and manner as may be

prescribed. A barga contract shall be valid for a period of five

years commencing from such date as may be specified in the barga

contract.” Chapter IV of the Land Reforms Rules, 1984, rule 6

discusses about barga contract.

“Any person cultivating the land of another person as a bargadar

immediately before the commencement of ordinance shall be deemed

to be a bargadar in respect of such land under this ordinance. A

barga contract executed under this section shall be deemed to be

effective from the date of commencement of this ordinance, and

shall be valid for a period of five years from that date.”

54

As it has been discussed earlier that, for protecting interests

of the bargadars, the impugned act Land Reforms Ordinance, 1984

has been placed. But how much the goal has been achieved, this is

main concern to inform us. Here we discuss about the achievements

of enacting the said ordinance.

1.Cultivation of barga lands after bargadar’s deathis against the interests of bargadars:

Section 10 of the Land Reforms Ordinance, 1984 says that,

“Where the bargadar dies without leaving any person in his family

who is in a position to cultivate the land, the owner of the land

may bring the land under his possession or allow such land to be

cultivated by another bargadar.”

Here if we put a simple analysis over the

section, it seems to us that, it goes against the interests of

the bargadar, because, ‘when a bargadar dies, without leaving any

person’ here is nothing described about the person, whether,

female is included or not? On the other hand who are members of

family has not been explained.

The main crisis of this section is that, whole

barga land shall return to the owner or Malik that is against the

interests of bargadar. Effect of death of bargadars is also

discussed under chapter V, rule 7 of the Land Reforms Ordinance,

1984.

55

i) The term ‘reasonableness’ imposed in section 11 mayaffect the interests of bargadars:

Section 11 states that, “No owner shall be entitled to terminate

a barga contract except in execution of an order, made by the

prescribed authority on the ground that-

a) The bargadar has, without any reasonable cause

failed to cultivate the barga land.

b) The bargadar has without any reasonable cause

failed to produce any crop equal to the average output

of such crop in any land similar to the barga land in

the locality.

c) The bargadar has used the land wholly or partly

for any purpose other than agriculture.

Here without dissecting deeply the impugned section or sub-

sections – we face with three questions–

1. If bargadars without any reasonable cause fail to

cultivate the land shall be terminated. There is question

of reasonableness. How reasonableness would be determined

did not mention therefore there may have a great chance

to abuse the word reasonableness in favour of owner or

Malik of barga land.

2. The second confusion is that if the bargadar without

reasonable cause failed to produce average crops. This is

a whimsical portion of law, because every year the time

for cultivation is not same. It varies upon the weather

56

or climate change. If once the cultivator fall in trap,

then according to this section Malik shall take

privileges than bargadars, here also interests of the

bargadar has been vitiated.

3. The third question is that, if the bargadar for any

reason partly or wholly use the land without agricultural

purpose, then contract would be terminated.

Here are two seasons for cultivation and the left season land is

to be uncultivated, if the bargadar wants to cultivate during

that unseasoned then contract of barga land shall be terminated,

it is against the interest of the bargadars.

However, we may reach to a decision, after discussing the above

sections that, these are to be amended in favor of bargadar.

ii) Inapplicability of section 12(3) of the Land Reforms

Ordinance, 1984:

The proportion of harvested crops has been duly described in

section 12(1) of the ordinance. After the distribution, there in

section 12(3) is rule to give a receipt or notice to the owner,

for conformity of handing over the crops. Actually it is a good

rule to protect or15 to deal the barga contract with clarity, but

in reality this rule is not applicable, the concerned parties are

not cautious about the rule, therefore, it requires enforcing the15 http://www.banglapedia.org/HT/Z_0010.htm, accessed on 30/01/15

57

law. Under this section method of sharing of the produce is also

discussed under chapter VI, rule 8 of the Land Reforms Rules,

1984.

iii) The produce from harvesting crops should be for

bargadars:

In section 12 the rule has been placed that, the extra produces

came out from the harvesting crops, shall be for owner, both side

of moral and legal it be should not be like, because as an owner

he does not invest any labor or minimum care, he just enjoys the

half interest only in return of being owner, on the other hand,

bargadar invests money, labor, care etc. therefore, basing upon

moral code, produces of harvesting crops should be for the

bargadars.

iv) Pre-emption of State Acquisition and Tenancy Act,1950 should not affect the section 13 of Land ReformsOrdinance, 1984:

If we read out section 13 of the Land Reforms Ordinance, 1984, it

says that,

“Where the owner intends to sell the barga land, he shall ask the

bargadar in writing if he is willing to purchase the land.”

It is happier news to the bargadar that he may buy the barga land

if he wants, meaning it is his land right to buy the land.58

But if we see the next potion of the section proviso says that,

“This provision shall not apply to where the owner sells

the land to a co-sharer or to his parent, wife, son, daughter or

son’s son or to any other member of his family.”

This proviso exactly resembles to section 96 of the State

Acquisition and Tenancy act, 1950 -it is also right to pre-

emption. Here we can see express conflict between section 13 of

Land Reforms Ordinance, 1984 and State Acquisition and Tenancy

Act, 1950. Although conflict has been 16dismissed by imposing the

proviso, but this proviso goesagainst the interests of

thebargadar. Therefore this proviso should be abolished.

v) The question of validity of the Land ReformsOrdinance, 1984 after coming 7th amendment judgment:

It is mandate of article 65 of the constitution that every law

must be passed during session of parliamentary. But during

emergence a power to enact law has been given to the president in

article 93 of the constitution without any parliamentary session.

The requirement is that the ordinance must be placed and passed

by the vote of parliament members within thirty days of sitting

of the parliament session.

Now we should turn into the Land Reforms Ordinance, 1984, it was

passed during martial law regime of General Ershad and the laws

from 1982-1986 were validated by passing Seventh Amendment Act,

1986 of the constitution.16 http://www.khyberpakhtunkhwa.gov.pk/Gov/Details.php?id=3

59

It is very unfortunate or luckily fortunate that, in 2011 Seventh

Amendment has been declared void and unconstitutional, it amounts

that Land Reforms Ordinance 1984 is also unconstitutional as it

was under the package, until it is again placed and passed by the

parliament within thirty days. Here, in case of Land Reforms

Ordinance, 1984, thirty days have been over, and now the validity

of this ordinance has been questioned17.

Section 14 of this ordinance discusses about ceiling of barga

land which states that, “No bargadar shall be entitled to

cultivate more than fifteen standard bighas of land. He can only

hold the land by one kind of mortgage, that is, complete

usufructualry mortgage. If a bargadar cultivates land in excess

of fifteen bighas of land, the share of the produce due to him as

a bargadar in respect of the excess land may be compulsorily

produced by the Government by order made in this behalf by the

prescribed authority.”

Section 15 states that, “No person shall cultivate the land of

another person except under a barga contract or complete

usufructuary mortgage or as a servant or laborer. If a person

cultivates the land of another person in violation of the

provisions of this section, the produce of the land may be

compulsorily procured by the govt. by order made in this behalf

by the prescribed authority.”

17 The constitution of Bangladesh.

60

Section 16 states about the disputes regarding this ordinance. It

says, “Every dispute between a bargadar and the owner in respect

of division or delivery of the produce, termination of barga

contract, place of storing and thrashing of the produce, shall be

decided by the prescribed authority.”

4.5 Difference between the Rights and Liabilities of Raiyats and Bargadars:

In chapter XIII of the State Acquisition and Tenancy Act, 1950

rights and liabilities of a raiyat is discussed and from here we

get the difference and reforms in the sector of rights and

liabilities of raiyats from rights of the bargadars.

i. Rights in Respect of Use of Land:

Section 83 of the State Acquisition and Tenancy Act, 1950 says

about rights of raiyat in respect of use of land. It says, “A

raiyat shall have the right to occupy and use the land comprised

in his holding in any manner be likes.”

61

But according to the Land Reforms Ordinance, 1984, the rights of

the bargadars is limited as per contracted by barga contract

between the owner and the bargadar.

ii. Devolution of Holding on the Death:

Section 84 of the SAT Act, 1950 states, “if a raiyat dies

intestate his holding shall subject to and in a manner not

inconsistent with, the provision of this act, descend in the same

manner as hisother immovable property. Provided that in any case

in which under the law of inheritance, to which the raiyat is

subject, his other property goes to the state, his interest in

the holding shall be extinguished.”

Section 10 of the LRO, 1984 states, “Where a bargadar diesbefore the expiry of the barga contract, the cultivation of the

barga land may be continued by the surviving members of the

family of the deceased bargadar till such expiry or till the

barga contract is terminated under this ordinance. Where the

bargadar dies without leaving any person in his family who is in

a position to cultivate the land, the owner of the land may bring

the land under his personal cultivation or allow such land to be

cultivated by another bargadar.

So from the words of the section it is clear that, raiyat gets

absolute right in the land and so after his death his property

devolves upon his heirs or as per his will. But bargadar gets

limited right and so after his death, if he has no heir left, his

62

barga land would be taken by his owner of the land for

cultivation.

iii. Ground for Eviction:

Section85 of the SAT Act, 1950 says that, “A raiyat shall not be

ejected from his holding or any part of his holding, except in

execution of a decree for ejectment from the whole holding or any

part of the holding, as the case may be, passed by a civil court,

on the ground that he has done any act in contravention of the

provisions of this act with respect to the whole holding or the

part concerned.”

In case of a bargadar, he would be ejected or not from his barga

land would be decided by the barga contract made between him and

the land owner. But he cannot be evicted from his homestead

otherwise than acquisition.

iv. In Case of Diluvion and Alluvion:

Diluvion means losing of land in the river or sea and alluvion

means reappearing of the land.According to section 86 of the SAT

Act, 1950 if any land is lost by diluvion, the right of tenant

63

over the land does not extinguish if the tenant keeps paying the

rent or as per the collector says. When the land reappears in

situ in 30 years then the tenant can apply for the land as per

his right exists till 30 years.

But LRO, 1984 does not say anything about the rights of a

bargadar in case of alluvion and diluvion of the land.

v. Right in Land Gained by Accession from Recess of

River or Sea:

According to section 87 of the SAT Act, 1950, “When any land

gained by accession, whether from the recess of river or the sea.

It shall not be considered as an increment to the holding or

tenancy to which it may be thus annexed, but shall vest

absolutely in the Government of the People’s Republic of

Bangladesh and shall be at their disposal.

But nothing in this regard is said in the LRO, 1984 about the

rights of the bargadar in such cases.18

vi. Transferability of Holding:

According to section 88 of the SAT Act, 1950, the holding of

raiyat or a share or portion thereof shall, subject to the

provisions of this act, be capable of being transferred by him

in the same manner and to the same extent as his other18 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/East_Bengal_State_Acquisition_and_Tenancy_Act_of_1950

64

immovable property. Provided any khas lands of a tea garden

retained shall not be transferred without the prior sanction

in writing of the deputy commissioner and that the proposed

transfer shall not in any way disrupt the entity of the tea

garden as a whole or in any way affect the cultivation of tea

for which the land is held.

But according to LRO, 1984 a bargadar can only hold the barga

land but cannot transfer it in any manner as he is not the

real owner of the land who has the title over it.

vii. Extinguishment of interest:According to section 92 of the SAT Act, 1950 the interest

of raiyat in a holding shall be extinguished-

a) When he dies intestate leaving no heir entitled to

inherit under the law of inheritance to which he is

subject.

b) When he surrenders any holding at the end of an

agricultural year by giving notice to the revenue-

officer.

c) When he voluntarily abandons his residence without

making any arrangement for payment of the rent as it

falls due and ceases to cultivate his holding.

d) When such inheritance has devolved by inheritance,

under the law of inheritance to which such raiyat is

subject, on a person who is not a bonafide cultivator

65

and such person has not cultivated the land comprised

in the holding.

On the other hand, under LRO, 1984, the rights of the bargadar in

barga land are extinguished for the following reasons according

to section 10 and 11-

a) Death of the bargadars when there is no other person in

the family of the bargadar who can cultivate the land.

b) If the bargadar fails to cultivate the barga land without

any reasonable cause, or

c) failed to produce any crop equal to the average output of

such land, or

d) the bargadar has hold the land for any other purpose than

agriculture, or

e) the bargadar has contravened any provisions of the

contract, or

f) has surrendered or abandoned voluntarily his right of

cultivation, or

g) the land is not under cultivation of the bargadar, or

h) The owner requires the land for bona fide personal

cultivation.

viii. Restrictions on sub-letting

According to section 93 of the SAT Act, 1950, no raiyat shall

sub-let the whole or any part of his holding on any terms and

66

conditions and if he does so his right will be extinguished over

the land and shall vest in the govt.

No specific provision about this is stated in LR0, 1984 but as a

bargadar cannot transfer the barga land it can be presumed that

he cannot sub-let the land also.

ix. Limitation on Mortgage:

According to section 95 of the SAT Act, 1950, no raiyat can

mortgage his land otherwise than complete usufructuary mortgage.

And as per the LRO, 1984 a bargadar cannot mortgage his land at

all.

x. Restriction of Alienation of Land by Aboriginals:

Section 97 of the SAT Act, 1950 states that, no aboriginal can

transfer his property to any other person who is not an

aboriginal without the permission of the revenue officer but no

provision is there in the LRO, 1984 regarding this. As regards

the differences in the matter of Ceiling and pre-emption, it is

discussed earlier in this research.

4.6 Summary of the Chapter

In 1984, the government had published the Land Reforms Ordinance

1984which allowed the retention of the highest ceiling of

landownership at 100 bigha per household. However, becoming a

land owner by purchasing a new piece of land was restricted to

67

60bighas. This new ordinance did not bring any significant

changes in the land ownership pattern. However, the Land Reform

Ordinance of 1984had legalized the rules of sharecropping.

As the people who are the real owners of lands are usually not

the cultivators, and the bargadars are the people who cultivates

the land and provides us with food which we need the most to

live, if they do not get their right properly our country cannot

develop in the food sector and become self-independent. So it is

really important to see if they are getting their rights

accordingly or not. What we can see from the above discussion is

that, there are so many lacking in the ordinance which is

hindering the bargadars from getting their rights. Specific rules

are needed to be enacted in this matter and work for the

betterment of the current conditions of the bargadars.

Bangladesh is agriculture based economic supported country

because of its geographical Position and environmental condition.

Being a blessed part of the earth it’s social, cultural, and

economical development directly or indirectly related to

agriculture. This part of the world Experience the governance of

many colonial system e.g. Mogul, British. The English influenced

the culture, custom, livelihood of the inhabitants of this part

as well as this subcontinent in large extent.

Land Reforms Ordinance, 1984 is the first ordinance that pavedthe way for the long cherished reformation of lands in

Bangladesh. Land Reforms Ordinance seemed to be enacted as the

68

first of its kind that is going to meet the demand of the time.

Land Reforms Ordinance, 1984 later change to rules has a history

of centuries behind it.

Chapter Five

Concluding Chapter

8.1 Findings

The findings of this research are:

Mismanagement:

Lack of office correspondence in terms of giving bribe, and lack

of correspondence with the local influential’s played major roles

in not being selected to get khas land 'Incomplete and

69

inappropriate' application was termed as major factor in being

rejected to get enlisted. Ignorance, in access and non-

availability of appropriate information regarding submission of

`appropriate and complete' application might have played some

critical roles.

Abstract in Evaluation of Land Administration system:

Land Administration (LA) is perhaps the only sector that is

submerged into all levels and types of corruption. Basing on this

multiple corruption paradigm in LA, this study attempts to

construct a conceptual framework for developing concepts to

explain the meaning of property and land. Throughout an empirical

survey finding of Transparency International Bangladesh (TIB), it

discussed on different property regime regarding on structural

changes of land management system, especially focused on land

reform, land tenure, ways of access to land, and religious

aspects of land management. As a result it tends to provide an

impression on the platform of corrupted acts, like dishonesty,

bribery and fraud.

Partition of India and Pakistan:

After the Partition of India and Pakistan, many people have

been migrated from this

country of their choice. And for the reason of migration they

leave their dwelling

houses and landed Properties. Then after 1971, Bangladesh broke

70

away from Pakistan

by the Ordinance a new law was enacted in Bangladesh known as

vested and Non

Resident Property Act, 1974.

Abandoned property:

The law of abandoned property where any abandoned property

shall be used for the public purposes which is trust for a

public purpose of a religious or Charitable nature by the

Abandoned Property (Control, Management and Disposal) order,

1972 by the presidents order no-16 of 1972.

Unequal distribution of Kash land:

Corruption in the land office has played immense role in the

unequal distribution of Khas land among the beneficiaries in

Debhata and Shailkupa. Both the government officials and public

representatives were the principal actors in the delivery

mechanism of khas land. The local influentials are also important

actors in the delivery mechanism. Potential beneficiaries lack of

contact with government office, non-congenial relationship with

local influential’s illegal occupancy of Khas land by others,

less availability of khas land, and "incomplete and inappropriate

application".

To pay the revenue of the land created a method of mutation. The

71

Provision in Civil Procedure regarding and Administration. The

land taxes must be collected rigorously from individuals and

Government and autonomous bodies. Land acquisition of

Government to be determined accordance with overall national

land policy, By the Public Demand Recovery Act, 1918 any

person shall be given particular changes for using their

landing property, Most of the important matter is in our land

administration we have lots of Problem which I will clearing in

Recommendations.

8.2 Recommendation

My recommendations for solving the problems are:

Upgrading of land management:

Reform and upgrading of land management to be accepted as a

corner stone of land policy. The right of tribal upon land

72

should ensure. Corruption may be reduced by mental

development.

Land acquisition needs of Government to be determined strictly

in accordance with overall national land use policy

Mutation of record of rights:

The present system does not provide for simultaneous mutation

of record of rights along with registration of land transfer

deeds. This leads to civil and criminal litigation in cases of

false transfers in the interest of protecting tenancy rights of

benefice owners and efficient land management, simultaneous

registration and mutation under a single authority like

Assistant Commissioner (land) at Thana level to be introduced.

Modernization is essential:

Modernization is essential. It is essential on registration

office about documents mutation and others to modernize it may

be computerized so that people can get information easily. The

work of district registrar is half judicial work so we have to

conscious about the post. Local administration should be

transparent and the service program may be increase.

Effective law reform commission is a claim of time. Land survey

office may be institute in the union & Upazila level. After

completing the partition it is to be register and mutation is to

73

be completed. Rent procedure the transferred and administration

should be strong.

Free from corruption:

Khas land should be given to the actual land less people and

freedom fighter and unsound mind. Political pressure and

corruption should be reduced by ensuring law and people should

be conscious about these problem otherwise mutation,

registration, Khas land distribution could not free from

corruption. To conscious people and to redact poverty

educational quality should be improved.

Collect tax rigorously:

Land taxes must be collected rigorously from individuals and

Government and autonomous bodies, including defence

installations. Land tax should be at progressive rates different

rates for different uses of land.

Khas land distribution:

All Khas land distribution program should be implemented

through a high powered committee under the leadership of

Deputy Commissioner and including ADC (Revenue),SP/Additional

SP, AC (Land) and Union Parishad Chairman, through public

hearing onsite.

Mutation, Land, Registration, Distribution of Khas land,

74

Revenue, Management of Vested property, Abandoned Property laws

should be more effective. Step should be taken aware moral

sensibility; otherwise it will be impossible to reduce

corruption by just making law.

8.3 ConclusionAfter completing the research we have already clear about the

Reformation of Land Administration. But unfortunately I am

sorry to say; in our Land Administration system there has a lot

of problems. And the 1st Problem is Corruption and the others

is our Land Administration system is very old and slow. So in

this Situation we can say that to ensure the right of people and

to free from corruption we will have to be moral Sensible

person, through now corruptions is part and parcel of our life.

So, in this stage we have to be moral sensibility and the Govt.

should to take necessary steps regarding removing the corruption

75

from in our landing administration system. Beside by the

modernization and faster proceeding we can get a Smart Land

Administration system in our country.

Land-peasant-wealth is interrelated and inters depended

categories. Land is the mother of wealth and labour of the

peasants is her father. Land and peasantry together form the

basis of reproductive civilization, and foundation for krishi

agriculture and krishti-culture. Land is scarce and, therefore,

establishing ownership right over land was always highly

competitive, in which violence, speculation and other deceptive

means were common. Land forms the basis of our social, economic

and political power structures. That is why the `noise' about

Land Reform has always been much pronounced in this part of the

world. Our contemporary history of land reform is essentially the

history of acquisition and distribution of Khas Land. This is the

most unresolved issue of Agrarian Reform. There was no dearth of

prescription from the side of states and governments in the past

fifty years (since the promulgation of East Bengal State

Acquisition and Tenancy Act 1950).

As most of the Bangladesh is predominantly dependant on land for

their daily living, proper laws and policy can protect their

interest. To this and in view, the importance of reshuffling and

introducing reform in the land management and land administration

by making amendment to these existing laws cannot be exaggerated.

76

Biblio

graphy

Statutes

The Land Reforms Ordinance, 1984.

The State Acquisition and Tenancy Act,1950

The Tenancy Rules,1954

Cases

Sudhanshu Kumar & Others Vs. Barada Charan Sarkar & Others 6BLD

Samsuddin Rahman and others v. Bihari Das and others JT 1996(6) 517 1996 SCALE (5)299

Sudhir Chandra Das VS Hatem Bepari 8 BLD, Page 244 Rahima Begum Vs. Md. Abdul Baten, 1990, 19 CLC (HCD)

Books

Ansar Uddin Sikder, Land Law in Bangladesh, University

Publishers, 3rd Edition 1993

Dr.L. Kabir, Land Laws of Bangladesh, Ain Prokashani, Dhaka, 6th

Edition, 2010

T. Hussaih, Land Rights in Bangladesh, Shams Publication, Dhaka,

1st Edition, 1995

77

Dr. Mohammad Towhidul Islam, Lectures on Land Law,1st Edition,2013

Md. Altaf hossain, Land Law of Bangladesh,1st Edition ,2000

Barkat.A.S.Zaman And S. Raihan , Political Economy of Khas land in

Bangladesh,2001

Websites

Permanent Settlement <http://en.wikipedia.org> accessed on

15/12/14.

Bargadars Right from the perspective of Land Reforms

Ordinance 1984 , Nadia Rahman, law, University of Dhaka

<https://www.academia.edu> accessed on 05/02/15

The Bangle alluvion and dilluvion Regulation, 1825

<http://www.khyberpakhtunkhwa.gov> accessed on 05/02/15.

East Bengal State Acquisition and Tenancy Act of 1950

<http://en.wikipedia.org> accessed on 08/01/15

Supreme Court of Bangladesh <http://en.wikipedia.org >

accessed on 12/01/15

Appellate Court <http://en.wikipedia.org/ > accessed on

09/02/15

78

79