By

T. Haque

• At the time of independence, India inherited from theBritish a feudal agrarian structure, in which land rightswere concentrated in the hands of a few zamindars/intermediaries, while actual cultivators/ tenant did nothave any right as security of tenure. This was aninefficient, unequal and unjust structure. The EasternIndia was most adversely affected by it.

INTRODUCTION

• After independence, almost all state governmentspassed land reform laws for (i) abolition ofintermediaries, (ii) abolition/regulation of tenancy,(iii) imposition of ceilings on landholdings andredistribution of ceiling surplus land, (iv) preventionof tribal land alienation, (v) bhoodan and gramdan.Also states like Punjab, Haryana and Uttar Pradeshmade attempts to consolidate fragmented holdings.

• The main objectives of these reforms were to createcondition for an agrarian economy with high levels ofefficiency and equity (second Five Year Plan).

Key Achievements of Land Reforms Due to abolition of intermediaries, about 20 million

cultivators were brought into direct contact with the state.

Due to abolition / restriction of tenancy, about 12.6 million tenants were conferred occupancy or ownership right, over 6.7 million hectares.

Due to ceiling on land holdings, about 5 million acres of ceiling surplus land have been distributed among 5.4 million families, of which 2.1 million was SCs, 0.9 million STs and 2.4 million others. The state of West Bengal alone distributed 1.02 million acres among 2.85 million beneficiaries.

Also various state governments distributed 14.7 million acres of Government land to rural landless families, of which AP alone distributed 4.7 million acres and UP about 2.5 million acres

About 2.32 million acres of Bhoodan and Gramdanland was distributed among 0.315 million families.

Till recently, almost 4.53 lakh cases of tribal land alienation were filed, involving 1.1 million acres, out of which 0.98 million acres were restored to the tribal land onwners

About 174.2 million acres of land were consolidated, out of which 134.0 million acres was in the state of Punjab, Haryana, UP and Maharashtra.

Status of Land Reforms in Various States (as on Dec, 2015, No. in million and Area in million acre)

State Ceiling

Surplus

land

distributed

No. of

Celling

Beneficiarie

s

No. of tenants

conferred

ownership,

occupancy

right

Area

transfer

red to

tenants

Govt.

Land

Distrib

uted

Bhoodan

land

distributed

Area

consolidated

AP 0.56 0.47 0.11 0.60 4.2 0.11 0.82Assam 0.55 0.45 2.9 3.17 0.59 0.00 NA

Bihar 0.35 0.46 NR NR 1.32 0.02 9.61

Chhattisgarh 0.61 0.27 NR NR NROdisha 0.16 0.14 0.30 1.11 0.73 0.58 2.97

Jharkhand 0.00086 0.00132 NA NA NA NA NIL

Kerala 0.07 0.77 2.84 1.45 0.46 NEG NA

West Bengal 1.05 3.14 1.51 1.11 0.43 NEG NA

Karnataka 0.24 0.058 0.60 2.63 0.14 NEG 2.68

Maharashtra 0.63 0.14 1.49 4.29 1.02 0.03 52.65

Status of Land Reforms in Various States

State Ceiling

Surplus

land

distributed

No. of

Celling

Benefic

iaries

No. of tenants

conferred

ownership,

occupancy right

Area

transfe

rred to

tenants

Govt.

Land

Distribut

ed

Bhoodan

land

distribut

ed

Area

consolida

ted

Punjab 0.08 0.07 NR NR 0.11 NEG 12.18

Haryana 0.10 0.03 NR NR 0.0 NEG 10.44

MP 0.13 0.05 NR NR 0.08 0.14 9.56

Rajasthan 0.45 0.08 0.02 NR 0.11 0.11 4.23

TN 0.19 0.15 0.50 0.69 0.29 0.02 NA

UP 0.27 0.31 NR NR 2.49 0.42 58.77

Gujarat 0.17 0.04 1.28 2.60 1.38 0.03 7.0

HP 0.006 0.004 0.40 NR 0.02 NEG 3.0

J&K 0.008 NA 0.61 NR NR NEG 0.14

India 5.10 1.35 12.6 16.7 14.8 1.65 174.25

Share of Households and Area Affected by Land Reforms Across States (%)

State Tenancy Ceiling

Area (%) Households(%) Area (%) Households (%)

Andhra Pradesh 3.48 0.75 8.34 3.81

Bihar 0.00 0.00 4.42 4.00

Gujarat 15.00 11.20 1.95 0.31

Haryana 0.51 0.01 1.26 0.26

Himachal Pradesh 0.16 3.19 0.06 0.05

Karnataka 15.38 5.29 1.71 0.30

Kerala 8.47 12.49 1.30 1.04

Madhya Pradesh 2.15 0.61 2.69 0.71

Maharashtra 27.01 1.68 7.74 1.08

Orissa 0.15 1.43 2.24 1.28

Punjab 1.89 0.04 1.50 0.25

Rajasthan 0.00 0.16 6.63 0.75

Tamil Nadu 3.85 3.23 2.47 1.24

Uttar Pradesh 0.00 0.00 5.81 3.68

West Bengal 6.41 10.80 14.91 19.73

All India 5.45 5.35 4.41 2.27

State wise annual growth rates of GSDP from agriculture & allied activities

State1981-82 to

1993-941993-94 to

2003-042004-05 to

2009-102009-10 to

2013-14Andhra Pradesh 3.9 3.5 5.42 4.5Assam 2.5 0.7 2.94 2.9Bihar 1.1 2.4 3.2 8.03Chhattisgarh 4.9 2 3.85 8.96Gujarat 8.8 1.7 3.2 7.99Jharkhand 1.1 3.7 7.48 11.9Karnataka 4.5 1.2 4.89 0.27Kerala 3.2 -1.6 -0.88 0.26Madhya Pradesh 4.9 1.1 4.37 13.36Maharashtra 5.7 1.1 3.96 4.37Odisha 2.6 7.9 3.63 1.27Punjab 4.9 2.2 2.18 1.01Uttar Pradesh 2.8 2.7 2.59 4.24Uttarakhand 2.8 2.4 1.58 4.16West Bengal 5.3 3.1 2.8 1.4All India 3.4 2.3 3.47 4.87

State wise growth rate of yield of Rice

States

Rice CGAR

TE-1974

TE-1984

TE-1994

TE-2004

TE-2014

1974-84

1984-94

1994-2004

2004-2014

Assam 970.3 1065 1310 1489 1951 0.9 2.1 1.3 2.7

Bihar 876.9 929.5 1137 1244 2065 0.6 2 0.9 5.2

Odisha 847.2 986.2 1364 1236 1695 1.5 3.3 -1 3.2

Eastern UP 630 1070 1740

Uttar Pradesh 782.7 1231 1850 1939 2421 4.6 4.2 0.5 2.3

West Bengal 1181 1360 1979 2513 2745 1.4 3.8 2.4 0.9

Chhattisgarh 770.0 880 .0 1240 1107 1703 4.4

Uttarakhand 2206

MP 736.8 800.5 1113 784.2 1429 0.8 3.4 -3.4 6.2

State wise growth rate of yield of Rice

States

Rice CGAR

TE-1974

TE-1984

TE-1994

TE-2004

TE-2014

1974-84

1984-94

1994-2004

2004-2014

AP 1572 2090 2563 2906 3081 2.9 2.1 1.3 0.6

Gujarat 648.3 1319 1463 1500 2139 7.4 1 0.3 3.6

Haryana 1627 2508 2733 2805 3191 4.4 0.9 0.3 1.3

Karnataka 1770 1968 2498 2385 2697 1.1 2.4 -0.5 1.2

Kerala 1647 1681 1983 4611 2620 0.2 1.7 8.8 -5.5

Maharashtra 901.8 1310 1562 1498 1913 3.8 1.8 -0.4 2.5

Rajasthan 677.7 1155 1116 1316 1935 5.5 -0.4 1.7 3.9

Tamil Nadu 2057 1979 3206 2457 3243 -0.4 4.9 -2.6 2.8

All India 1089 1372 1848 1935 2424 2.3 3 0.5 2.3

State wise growth rate of yield of Foodgrains

States

Food Grains CGAR

TE-1974

TE-1984

TE-1994

TE-2004

TE-2014

1974-84

1984-94

1994-2004

2004-2014

Assam 978 1059 1296 1431 1861 0.8 2 1 2.7

Bihar 882.4 1046 1435 1454 2161 1.7 3.2 0.1 4

Odisha 846.4 982.8 1305 1115 1507 1.5 2.9 -1.6 3.1

Uttar Pradesh 1002 1478 1936 2049 2508 4 2.7 0.6 2

West Bengal 1213 1408 2007 2425 2695 1.5 3.6 1.9 1.1

Chhattisgarh 953.7 1471 4.4

Uttarakhand 1626 1967 1.9

Madhya Pradesh

729.1 877.9 1195 1107 1596 1.9 3.1 -0.8 3.7

State wise growth rate of yield of Foodgrains

StatesFood Grains CGAR

TE-1974

TE-1984

TE-1994

TE-2004

TE-2014

1974-84

1984-94

1994-2004

2004-2014

Andhra Pradesh

1046 1461 2006 1948 2617 3.4 3.2 -0.3 3

Gujarat 637.3 1134 1237 1385 1980 5.9 0.9 1.1 3.6

Haryana 993.9 1739 2682 3088 3807 5.8 4.4 1.4 2.1

Karnataka 977.8 1063 1422 1097 1579 0.8 3 -2.6 3.7

Kerala 1632 1621 1910 2121 2591 -0.1 1.7 1.1 2

Maharashtra 497.6 732.8 1004 847.2 1133 4 3.2 -1.7 3

Rajasthan 509.1 785.4 916.4 1056 1387 4.4 1.6 1.4 2.8

Punjab 1956 2913 3612 3932 4404 4.1 2.2 0.9 1.1

Tamil Nadu 1526 1577 2554 1675 2616 0.3 4.9 -4.1 4.6

All India 821.8 1134 1565 1638 2109 3.3 3.3 0.5 2.6

Rural Poverty HCR- Tendulkar MethodologyState 1993-94 2004-05 2009-10 2011-12

Assam 54.9 36.4 39.9 33.9Madhya Pradesh 49.0 53.6 42.0 35.7Chhattisgarh 55.9 55.1 56.1 44.6Bihar 62.3 55.7 55.3 34.1Jharkhand 65.9 51.6 41.6 40.8Jammu & Kashmir 32.5 14.1 8.1 11.5Kerala 33.9 20.2 12.0 9.1Odisha 63.0 60.8 39.2 35.7Punjab 20.3 22.1 14.6 7.7Rajasthan 40.8 35.8 26.4 16.1Uttar Pradesh 50.9 42.7 39.4 30.4Uttarakhand 36.7 35.1 14.9 11.6West Bengal 42.5 38.2 28.8 22.5Haryana 40.0 24.8 18.6 11.6All India 50.1 41.8 33.8 25.7

Changes in Agrarian Structure

States

Proportion of Marginal Holdings

Proportion of area under

marginal holdingsProportion of small holdings

Proportion of area under small

holdings

1970-71

2010-11

1970-71

2010-11

1970-71

2010-11

1970-71

2010-11

Assam 11.9 67.3 5.5 25.8 14.6 18.3 10.3 22.9

Bihar 64.3 91.1 16.1 57.4 14.6 5.9 13.6 18.6

Orissa 43.3 72.2 11.9 39.6 32.9 19.7 26.6 30.9

West Bengal 60.0 82.2 21.5 52.5 22.3 13.8 25.7 28.3

Chhattisgarh 58.3 18.7 22.2 23.2

Jharkhand 68.2 24.1 15.8 18.7

Madhya Pradesh 31.8 43.9 3.4 12.1 16.8 27.6 6.2 21.9

Gujarat 23.8 37.2 3.0 8.9 19.1 29.3 6.8 21.0

Changes in Agrarian Structure (contd)

States

Proportion of Marginal Holdings

Proportion of area under marginal holdings

Proportion of small holdings

Proportion of area under small

holdings

1970-71

2010-11

1970-71 2010-11 1970-71 2010-11 1970-71 2010-11

Andhra Pradesh 46.0 63.9 8.0 26.1 19.6 22.2 11.3 28.8

Karnataka 30.5 49.1 4.8 15.2 23.6 27.3 10.7 24.8

Kerala 81.6 96.3 33.8 58.6 11.6 2.6 22.9 18.7

Maharashtra 25.1 49.0 2.7 16.1 17.7 29.6 6.1 29.0

Punjab 37.6 15.6 5.7 2.6 18.9 18.6 9.4 6.8

Rajasthan 25.2 36.5 2.3 5.9 18.5 21.9 4.9 10.2

Tamil Nadu 58.8 77.2 17.1 35.3 20.9 14.6 20.5 25.3

Uttar Pradesh 66.8 79.5 21.1 40.7 17.2 13.0 20.8 24.1

All India 50.2 67.1 8.8 22.5 18.9 17.9 11.7 22.1

State-wise Average Size of Operational Holdings by Size Class

States Marginal Small All Classes1970-71 2010-11 1970-71 2010-11 1970-71 2010-11

Andhra Pradesh 0.44 0.44 1.44 1.41 2.51 1.08Assam 3.12 0.42 4.75 1.38 6.73 1.1Bihar 0.38 0.25 1.41 1.25 1.52 0.39Gujarat 0.52 0.49 1.47 1.45 4.11 2.03Karnataka 0.51 0.48 1.45 1.41 3.2 1.55Kerala 0.29 0.13 1.36 1.57 0.69 0.22Madhya Pradesh 0.43 0.49 1.48 1.42 4 1.78Maharashtra 0.47 0.47 1.46 1.42 4.28 1.44Orissa 0.52 0.57 1.53 1.63 1.89 1.04Punjab 0.44 0.61 1.43 1.38 2.89 3.77Uttar Pradesh 0.37 0.39 1.4 1.4 1.16 0.76West Bengal 0.43 0.49 1.38 1.59 1.2 0.77Chhattisgarh 0.44 1.42 1.36Jharkhand 0.41 1.38 1.17All India 0.41 0.39 1.45 1.42 2.35 1.15

State wise Percentage distribution of Owned and Operated Area by Household Groups: 1961-62 and 2002-03

States Year Distribution of Owned

Area

Distribution of Operated

Area

Bottom

60%

Middle

30%

Top

10%

Bottom

60%

Middle

30%

Top

10%

Andhra

Pradesh

1961-62 6.5 34.4 59.1 15.8 36.7 47.5

2002-03 4.5 36.5 59.0 18.0 36.2 45.8

Bihar*1961-62 10.1 40.4 49.5 19.2 38.8 42.0

2002-03 11.5 38.0 50.5 17.9 40.6 41.5

Gujarat1961-62 13.5 43.0 43.5 22.5 39.7 37.8

2002-03 7.0 38.0 55.0 13.5 38.3 48.2

Karnataka1961-62 18.0 40.0 42.0 22.5 38.2 39.3

2002-03 11.5 39.8 48.7 18.9 38.1 43.0

Kerala1961-62 12.2 33.6 54.2 14.2 36.5 49.3

2002-03 19.5 23.7 56.8 24.3 27.9 47.8

Madhya

Pradesh *

1961-62 16.5 41.0 42.5 22.2 39.9 37.9

2002-03 15.5 40.0 44.5 20.5 39.2 40.3

Maharashtra1961-62 12.0 42.5 45.5 19.1 41.3 39.6

2002-03 10.5 42.0 47.5 20.2 40.3 39.5

State wise Percentage distribution of Owned and Operated Area by Household Groups: 1961-62 and 2002-03 (contd.)

States Year Distribution of Owned Area Distribution of Operated Area

Bottom

60%

Middle

30%Top 10% Bottom 60%

Middle

30%Top 10%

Orissa1961-62 12.0 39.5 48.5 23.5 37.9 38.6

2002-03 14.1 40.9 45.0 22.5 41.5 36.0

Punjab*1961-62 6.1 43.4 50.0 23.5 43.0 33.5

2002-03 2.0 36.7 61.3 49.0 40.6 54.5

Rajasthan1961-62 16.0 38.5 45.5 20.0 37.5 42.5

2002-03 13.4 36.9 49.7 15.0 37.0 48.0

Tamil Nadu1961-62 10.8 39.7 49.5 23.5 38.9 37.6

2002-03 2.0 36.0 62.0 14.2 40.0 45.8

Uttar

Pradesh *

1961-62 15.5 40.5 44.0 23.4 40.2 36.4

2002-03 14.0 40.7 45.3 18.1 41.6 40.3

West

Bengal

1961-62 13.5 42.7 49.8 26.8 39.4 33.8

2002-03 12.8 38.2 49.0 21.0 40.3 38.7

All-India1961-62 10.8 37.7 51.5 18.0 37.5 44.5

2002-03 8.3 36.5 55.2 14.5 37.1 48.4

Changes in the Structure of Workforce (%)

State

CultivatorsAgricultural Labourers Other Workers

1971 1981 2011 1971 1981 2011 1971 1981 2011

Assam 36.13 10.40 53.47

Bihar 43.34 43.77 25.34 38.92 35.44 44.65 17.74 20.79 30.01

Chhattisgarh 36.86 30.41 32.73

Orissa 49.17 47 21.35 28.28 27.65 13.82 22.55 25.35 64.83

Jharkhand 29.35 18.17 52.48

Kerala 17.8 13.18 5.84 30.7 28.19 9.85 51.5 58.63 84.31

MP 52.86 52.1 36.19 26.56 24.17 29.21 20.58 23.73 34.61

West Bengal 31.97 30.64 16.37 26.46 24.81 22.85 41.57 44.55 60.78

UP 57.43 58.02 36.43 19.95 16.32 8.61 22.62 25.66 54.96

Changes in the Structure of Workforce (%)

State

Cultivators Agricultural Labourers Other Workers

1971 1981 2011 1971 1981 2011 1971 1981 2011

AP 32.18 32.6 18.43 37.93 36.68 39.96 29.89 30.72 41.61

Gujarat 43.12 37.76 23.31 22.48 22.82 22.06 31.9 34.4 54.64

Haryana 49.08 44.97 27.99 16.21 16.4 12.70 34.71 38.63 59.31

Maharashtra 35.55 34.84 26.23 29.32 26.79 25.29 35.13 38.37 48.48

Punjab 42.56 36.32 30.63 20.11 22.83 22.61 37.33 40.85 46.76

Uttarakhand 34.90 21.84 43.26

ALL INDIA 42.91 41.53 26.46 26.88 25.16 23.77 30.21 33.31 49.77

% share of agriculture and allied sector in State Domestic Product

State 1970-71 1990-91 2013-14

Bihar 58 57.2 24

West Bengal 43.5 31.1 23.6

UP 60 39.1 26.9

Odisha 65.4 39.1 20.2

MP 59.7 40.6 35.9

Punjab 58.3 44.3 29

Chhattisgarh 18.4

Jharkhand 16.4

Per Worker NSDP of Agriculture and Allied Sector (Rs)

State 1970-71 1985-86 2012-13Punjab 3366 5380 217578

Haryana 3173 3802 165574

Gujarat 1851 1409 81151

WB 1816 2143 79885

Kerala 1796 1912 222851

Assam 1510 1654 55311

UP 1199 1451 52915

Uttarakhand 69358

MP 958 1037 55829

Orissa 1246 1407 42806

Bihar 895 1027 22700

Chhattisgarh 33362

Jharkhand 28785

State-wise Institutional Loans Issued per Hectare

State Loans Issued by PACs Loans Issued by SCBs

1984-85 1995-96 2014 1984-85 1997-98 2014

Assam 52 19.0 13 8 17914.9

Bihar 19 50 32786.4

Odisha 75 377 5644.9 84 213 21381.4

West Bengal 75 117 2518.3 135 228 55344.5

UP 92 222 454.2 43 156 36691.5

Uttarakhand 4737.1 85601.8

MP 135 243 2146.8 29 120 24173.5

Chhattisgarh 1773.2 11697.4

Punjab 1158 5110 2983.5 140 2034 126325.7

T. Nadu 224 3507 7687.4 757 4608 165767.5

All India 264 823 3845.8 131 823 55857.9

State-wise Net Irrigated Area% of net sown area irrigated

State 1961-62 1971-72 1984-85 2013-14

Punjab 42.6 72.5 86.4 100Tamil Nadu 41.6 42.7 45.6 56.3UP 28.1 40.4 57.3 84.8West Bengal 24.9 26.1 37.1 59.1Bihar 23.3 28.8 36.6 55.8Orissa 16.8 18.8 23.3 27.7Assam 26.7 25.6 21.2 10.8MP 5.8 8.9 15.7 61.3Maharashtra 6 8 10.9 18.7Kerala 16.9 20.1 12.4 19.4J&K 41.7 40.4 42 43.6Gujarat 7.8 14.4 23.4 41.1Chhattisgarh - - - 31.2Jharkhand - - - 15.7Uttarakhand - - - 46.8All India 18.3 22.7 29.7 48.1

Gini Co-efficient of Monthly Per-Capita Consumption Expenditure

State 1983-84 1993-94 2004-05 2009-10

Assam 0.192 0.176 0.195 0.244

Bihar 0.255 0.222 0.205 0.226

Chhattisgarh - - 0.295 0.276

J&K 0.221 0.234 0.237 0.235

Jharkhand - - 0.225 0.240

MP 0.292 0.278 0.265 0.292

Odisha 0.266 0.243 0.281 0.262

Punjab 0.279 0.265 0.279 0.288

Rajasthan 0.340 0.260 0.246 0.225

Uttar Pradesh 0.290 0.312 0.286 0.356

Uttarakhand

West Bengal 0.284 0.251 0.270 0.39

All India 0.297 0.282 0.300 0.291

Overall Assessment

The implementation of both ceilings on landholdingsand tenancy reforms was comparatively better in WestBengal than other states.

The initial impact of land reforms in West Bengal waspositive, but it could not be sustained in the long rundue to lack of other support system

Restriction on agricultural land leasing affectedagricultural growth and equity adversely in almostall places. Therefore, land leasing should belegalised and liberalized, in Eastern India and alsoother states.

The consolidation of land holdings was done only inPunjab, Haryana, UP and to some extent Maharashtra. Ithelped in agricultural productivity growth substantially inall these states. But in Eastern India, there was no effort tocompulsorily consolidate fragmented holdings. Moreparticularly, the initial gains from land reforms by WestBengal could not be sustained due to small and fragmentedholdings and lack of proper institutional support system.There is an urgent need for consolidation of holdings inEastern States which have tremendous potential forproductivity growth in agriculture.

There is no scope for further redistribution of ceilingsurplus land in Eastern India and elsewhere.

Currently, the Governments of West Bengal, Odishaand Bihar have schemes for allocation of smallhomestead plots which can temporarily provide reliefand supplementary livelihood for the landless families.These are good initiatives. But a substantial proportionof workforce would need to be gainfully employedoutside agriculture in the medium to long term

The system of updation and digitization of landrecords and maps in Eastern India is far fromsatisfactory. This should be taken up on priority basis.

Thank You