LAND REFORMS IN BIHAR: NEED FOR A FRESH APPRAISAL

 

 

PRASANNA KUMAR CHOUDHARY

 

 

INTRODUCTION

Land reforms, in my opinion, cannot be simply viewed from the perspective of acquiring land over and above the ceiling and distributing it to the landless and poor peasants, particularly belonging to the scheduled castes and tribes. Transfer of land from one hand to the other entails transfer of power also, and hence, it involves fierce political battles – even a political revolution. Furthermore, from the economic point of view, land reforms can be studied in relation to the development of productive forces, to the overall agricultural, and even industrial, development. Again, the impact of land reform measures in the overall evolution of our contemporary society can be probed to understand the mobility of various classes and castes, and their value-systems. To be precise, land reform measures need to be studied in a broader social milieu, since only in this way can one concretely foresee and recommend the next agenda of work in this regard. Therefore, I have divided my observations under a few sub-headings like ‘Land Reforms and Politics’, ‘Land Reforms and Economy’, ‘Land Reform and Bureaucracy’, and put my recommendations at appropriate places.

LAND REFORMS AND POLITICS

Society’s evolution is a synthetic process that hardly takes notice of the high objectives of any government programme, or of the pious wishes and aspirations of the liberal/progressive forces. So, if we leave aside the avowed aims and objectives of the land reforms programme, and try to get to the essence of it, then we can safely conclude that politically land reforms in Bihar are more-or-less over.

Like all major initiatives, land reforms was also couched with high-sounding phrases of social justice and transferring land to the lowest rung of the rural population. But objectively, Dalit-Adivasi landless and poor peasants were not in the position to fill the void created by the decline of upper-caste landed gentry. Hence, it was natural that land and political power passed into the hands of upper caste raiyats/under-raiyats and intermediate cultivating castes. Over the last forty years, Bihar witnessed a sort of political revolution – the raiyats and under-raiyats of yesteryears now hold the reins of political power. In place of upper caste conventional landlords, Kurmi-Yadava-Koeri kisan proprietors along with the similar sections of the upper castes (whose zamindars and prosperous occupancy raiyats enjoyed power in the earlier period also) acquired dominant status in the political affairs of the state, notwithstanding their inner squabbles and skirmishes. Within the Bhumihar community – an important cultivating caste of Bihar – the clash between raiyats/under-raiyats and zamindars manifested itself even during the freedom movement. The assertion and rise of intermediate caste kisans is a late phenomenon.Land reforms played its part in the ascendency of this class/caste of kisan proprietors, but it was only one of the means of their assertion. (So far as the part played by land reforms is concerned, even IAS probationers’ report provides a hint. They too found that Backward Class and caste Hindus constitute quite a sizeable percentage of beneficiaries of surplus ceiling land, and that the percentage of area allotted to ‘Other Castes’ is much more in case of micro data – 38.27% - as against 29.34% in case of macro data. Their field data reveals that the priority of land allotment to SCs, in particular, has not been strictly followed.)

The assertion of this class/caste took varied forms. In 50s, they were very few in number. Gradually their number began to rise since the sixties, and finally, they swarmed both sides of the Jawaharlal Nehru Marg. In parliamentary politics, Socialists-Lok Dal-Janata Party-Janata Dal became their channels of articulation and they resorted to all sorts of wheeling and dealing since the late 60s. Democracy gave them added strength due to their numerical superiority. They utilised the benefits of the Green Revolution’s package programme to the extent possible, and acquired sufficient economic muscle. They maintained a love-hate relationship with the Naxalbari movement which was objectively dalit agrarian labourers’ and poor peasants’ fight against upper caste landlords, and when due to this fight, the political power of the old landed gentry was weakened, they stepped in to fill the vacuum, since they were the only forces able to do that. Wherever extreme left movement is found fighting these kisan class/caste, the result is a war of attrition leading to the common ruin of the both; and whenever they (the upwardly mobile intermediate caste kisans) try to enter the mainstream, they have to woo them (the extreme leftists). (By the way, there always stand a Münzer behind a Martin Luther. While the Münzer factor challenges the very basis of oppressive society, the pragmatic Luthers reap the benefits of this challenge and of any such aborted revolutionary struggles.) Socially the assertion of this class/caste took the form of banditry also – in almost all corners of Bihar OBC dacoit gangs/rangdars/dons emerged and in many areas they successfully cut to size their rival upper caste gangs. Hence, the overall assertion of this new ruling class presented a very interesting scenario – Marx and Mandal, Lenin and Lorik, Mao Zedong and Mohan Bind, Karpoori Thakur and Krishi Bazar Samitis, Gandhi and Gramin Banks, Arakshan and Angrezi Hatao .... all get fused in the social evolution of this class. This was Bihar’s own way of the evolution of the class of peasant proprietors – of kisans from among the earlier strata of occupancy/non-occupancy raiyats, under-raiyats, bataidars etc. This class of Bihari kisans – particularly the rich and rising among them – although has similarities with its counterparts in other regions of the world so far as certain general features are concerned, they cannot be easily compared with a English farmer, or a Russian kulak, or even a Chinese semi-feudal lord.So, we are in a peasant raj. While in the Indian business scene, safari suits replaced dhoti-kurtawallahs, in Bihar Vidhan Sabha, the cream-white-dhoti-kurta-clad bhadralok Maliks were dethroned by JP-cut-kurta-pyjama-clad rustic youth and kisans. While old rural hats and golas gave way to modern bazaars, the lush green lawns of Vidhan Sabha were converted into village hats where these new leaders are seen coming and going talking of potatoes and politics. They brought with them their rustic language and style. They use folk jokes and abuses, and best, dialogues from TV mega-serial Mahabharat. Soon they spread everywhere. Yes, our democracy was never so plebeian as it is today.

Enter the kisans and the whole edifice of longstanding ‘decency’ and ‘decorum’ fell apart. We who were accustomed to this decency and decorum, were taken aback and began to scoff at the rampant degeneration of political culture. But it is often found, particularly in periods of social transition that a society cannot manage to remain both democratic and decent; Bihar is no exception. One is free to indulge in nostalgia, but this nostalgia will provide no relief and one has to come to terms with this emerging reality. Contemporary history often proves to be a nightmare, from which we cannot escape; we will have to live with it – perish or flourish with it. Yes, here is the raj, dance here!

While dancing is allowed in poetry, in real life what we encountered in this period was dance of death, of barbarity, and of course, of valour. The whole period of this social transition was marked by mayhems and massacres, by militant mass movements and resistance, by valiant fights and vile machinations. ....Simultaneously with the rise of these kisan castes, emerged a new business class in almost all blocks of Bihar, with strong rural roots and having symbiotic relationship with these kisans. Accumulation of wealth was realised through all possible means. Piracy on high seas was not possible, but robberies on highways were within reach. Dispossessing a nabob of his estate was now out of question, but extracting ransom through kidnappings was feasible. Wealth accumulated in this way was utilised in buying buses or building cinema halls or in acquiring contracts, followed by a mansion in Patna or in district headquarters. You will even find this fellow starting a school or a college, and donating money for building a Ram/Hanuman or Krishna Mandir. A few years later, he will be found sitting in the treasury or opposition bench of the Vidhan Sabha. Backed by their caste-folk, these types just gun their way into business or the Vidhan Sabha. After all, which society has achieved social transformation in a civilised manner? There may be a few exceptions, but these exceptions only prove the rule. Human civilisation has not yet evolved a civilised way of social transformation.

The very composition of this rising prosperous kisan class/caste of Bihar gives a hint to its wider social connections – a member of his family will be found working in any public sector or private industry in Jharkhand, one may be a daroga, another may be a doctor or an engineer, one close relative will be found working as a peon or clerk while another relative may be a state government official, and some other a political leader. While voting along class/caste line – given the circumstances existing during the election period – to a particular political party at macro-level, they try to forge relationship with all important political leaders at micro-level, practising a thorough political pragmatism. While political parties may remain confined to their dogmas, this class has no such inhibitions – it has the necessary potential to seduce and ‘corrupt’ political parties of various hues.

Perhaps I am deviating from the original topic. But this deviation was meant to explain the fact stated in the beginning, i.e. the political objectives of the land reforms have been more-or-less fulfilled. The erstwhile raiyats and under-raiyats have now evolved into independent kisans and their prosperous/vocal/rising sections belonging principally to the four major cultivating castes – Bhumihar, Kurmi, Yadava, Koeri – are now practically rulers, although their inner clashes, and their contradiction and equation with remnants of old landed gentry and old social equations continue to operate. This rising class/caste equation is going to stay – its historical stage has just begun. Herein lies the social basis of what is called ‘lack of political will’. There was lack of political will in the earlier phase because the upper caste landed gentry then dominated the ruling party. There is lack of political will today because new kisan rulers simply do not need it much.

All these observations do not mean that SC/ST agricultural labourers and poor peasants are nowhere in the picture. That is by no means the case. Land reforms – and all social transformations of such magnitude – provide them marginal benefits and give them scope to manoeuvre.The actual crisis of land reforms is that both agitationists and administrators have not yet come out with an innovative measure of agricultural development replacing land reforms. Even the residual problems of land reforms cannot be solved in the framework of land reforms programme – they can only be solved by attaching them with some other innovative step.

LAND REFORMS AND ECONOMY

Taking land reforms as a key to the development of productive forces is now a false proposition. Land reforms can only marginally help in the development of productive forces.The rise of kisan castes and class politically does not necessarily mean that they have innovative economic vision also. They lack it badly and that is the real tragedy. The rise of new political forces does not always run concurrently with the economic renewal of society (particularly when we talk in terms of a few decades and not of centuries). It does not also mean that these new rising kisan castes/class will not acquire the necessary economic vision in coming years. We are talking of today; and certainly innovative thinking is quite lacking. Populism and innovation do not run side by side; and what society, so far as its economic renewal is concerned, does need is not popular but ‘unpopular’ leaders who can call a spade a spade. Unpopularity is essential in this age since over the decades popular minds have been exposed to many illusions – so much so that these illusions have acquired an objective momentum of their own. But politics cannot be fully freed of populism since it is an art of popular mobilisation. Over the years the content of politics in the blood of society shows a disproportionate increase, causing a sort of diabetes, and to check this, a certain dose of insulin is required in the form of science and economics. Irrespective of the quality of political leadership at present, due to the very compulsions of Bihar economy in general, and of these kisans in particular, certain new initiatives are bound to take shape. We can here discuss only the broad contours of such initiatives in the rural sector.

There is a limit to the development of a predominantly food-grain-producing society. In the case of Bihar, given the quality of soil and agro-climatic conditions, this reflects a gross under-utilisation of the productive potential. Scientific organisation of agriculture necessitates both macro-level planning and incentives as well as micro-level awareness. This awareness is gradually growing among the enterprising kisans who provide the social basis for such re-organisation. Since our country became self-sufficient in food-grain production, even a mechanical extension of Punjab-Haryana-type Green Revolution will not perhaps make much headway. (Just as Tamilnadu-type or Maharashtra-type social reform movements could not be replicated here.) Here geographical conditions provide greater scope of diversified agricultural and side-line productions – introduction of new crops, fruit plantations, potato and vegetable cultivation, growing of commercial crops, and of pulses and oil-seeds, sericulture, acquaculture, dairy and poultry farming, etc., can be undertaken on a much larger scale in different suitable zones than is the present case. This requires dissemination of proper information as well as making available necessary infrastructural facilities. The marriage of science with the entrepreneurial potential of kisans who constitute the bulk of rural population can not only change the face of Bihar agriculture in the next few years, but also result in a new land pattern.

Scientific organisation of agriculture needs to be supplemented with a movement for mass entrepreneurship. Entrepreneurship is not a class category, but a human quality; it consists of adding value to the primary products, and value-adding is a continuous process. In the past, we have seen movements like ‘Grow More Food Campaign’, what Bihar needs today is a ‘Add More Value to Your Product Campaign’. Bihar has enormous possibilities of the development of agro-business and village-based enterprises, utilising the natural and human resources locally available. This sort of economic initiative is sure to ease traditional social tensions and give birth to new productive social relationships. In this regard few things need to be cleared.

No state can provide full employment to all of its citizens. It is neither feasible nor desirable. There is a limit beyond which the growth of state employment is in direct proportion to the growth of inefficiency in economy and totalitarianism in politics. The state monopolising all the natural and human resources of the country, will inevitably acquire monstrous powers to invade civil liberties and privacy of the individual. Moreover, totalitarianism and populism are just two faces of the same coin. Hence, there is no alternative to the self-employment programmes, to efforts towards developing individual and group entrepreneurship.In the post-independence period, due to economic initiatives from above, large-scale enterprises and infrastructure developed to an extent, but this was not supplemented by entrepreneurial initiatives from below (at least in Bihar). Now these infrastructures and assets built over the years remain unutilised or under-utilised, or are even getting rusted. No Bihari needs any proof of the colossal waste of infrastructure and assets which he encounters everyday in his life. In absence of development of entrepreneurship from below, Bihar is sliding backwards.‘Become an entrepreneur instead of a sahib or babu in a government office’ – making the youth think along this line adds a cultural dimension to this sort of economic initiatives, since this involves change in the value-system prevalent in contemporary society in which administrative jobs command highest attraction.

Entrepreneurial initiative from below cannot be fully realised without strengthening panchayati raj institutions and making panchayat elections mandatory. Democratic structures at grass-roots provide necessary impetus to such initiatives at lower levels, and it is well substantiated by the experience of other states also.This is not a proper forum for elaborating an economic manifesto for rural Bihar. Hence I have only narrated the basic thrust of rural development programme. The residual works of land reforms as mentioned in the recommendations of the Land Reform Unit of LBS National Academy of Administration should be taken up within the framework of these basic thrusts. Even in this regard, at this stage priority should be given to the computerisation of land records, storage and preservation of data relating to agriculture and rural development in a systematic and easily retrievable manner, and conferring tenancy and ownership rights to bataidars. Only in this way, can we put the cart before the horse. (So far as the use of computers in the area of land reforms is concerned, Mr Ram Sewak Sharma’s note in this regard is quite suggestive and warrants immediate attention. He has already devised a user-friendly software for operating these areas.)The new economic initiatives necessitate not only grass-root democratic institutions, but certain changes in bureaucracy also – not only at the level of organisation, but at the level of concepts as well. Habits die hard, and bureaucratic habits are supposed to defy any change at all; nevertheless, the complexion and composition of Indian bureaucracy has, over the years, changed a lot, and its inherent potential remains untapped due to lack of imaginative and visionary political leadership.

LAND REFORMS AND BUREAUCRACY

Flogging bureaucracy for the failure of any government programme is a favourite past-time of populist political upstarts. Bureaucracy, like all such institutions, has its distortions, but it is not going to be replaced by any other institution in the near future (it is another matter whether a society can altogether do away with it or not). Therefore, instead of abusing it, it is imperative to talk about its role and specific functions in development programmes.In my view, the report of the task force chaired by Mr P S Appu on agrarian relations eighteen years back can be considered as the last word on land reforms from the point of view of bureaucracy. The very fact that such a report with concrete recommendations could not drastically alter the situation is itself a proof that some other initiatives were required. The recent report of the Land Reforms Unit of the LBSNAA follows the pattern set by him , updates it, and in some aspects improves upon it.Viewed in the perspective of these reports, a committed bureaucrat is naturally tempted to become an activist, although such a change of function can hardly help since bureaucracy will still remain. So, instead of bureaucrats turning into activists, it is more important that activists should turn into entrepreneurs.

The new economic initiatives in rural areas demand not only grass-root level democracy, but a grass-root techno-bureaucrat too. In the initial periods of colonial rule, the institution of collector, its power and jurisdiction generated a lot of controversies and discussions among the British rulers. In the initial post-independence period, in the wake of community development programmes, the office of Block Development Officer became a subject matter of lively debates. Later on, due to ever-increasing administrative functions and specialisation, departments and cells proliferated which are supposed to be combined at the macro-level by the Cabinet Ministers-in-Charge and departmental secretaries. Although we have a grass-root bureaucrat in the form of BDO combining developmental works at block-levels, yet, this institution needs some fresh thrust to cope with the current necessities.

While for panchayati raj, village should be taken as unit, for rural development programmes, blocks still remain primary administrative units. By grass-root techno-bureaucrat, I, first of all, mean a ‘change master’ (Rosabeth Moss Kanter, ‘The Change Masters’, 1983) bureaucrat who can ‘put in place the systems, practices, culture and rewards that will encourage people to be enterprising – to solve problems and to see and take advantage of opportunities; form a structure that is built around small working teams having autonomy to act in their areas; and tap people’s problem-solving abilities, and enterprising skills.’ Thus, these grass-root bureaucrats need to be invested with necessary scientific managerial skills. Secondly, these grass-root bureaucrats should be an essential Bihari type who can fruitfully interact with the pride and prejudices of the village folk, and who is capable enough to fish in the troubled waters of Bihar. They can be drawn from administrative officers with technical background, agricultural scientists or economists, engineers, various faculties of management, or even from activists with good organisational skills and technical background. In addition to their pay, they can be even provided with incentives depending upon the success of entrepreneurial ventures in their blocks.It is very easy, and in some quarters even fashionable, to damn Bihar; but it is really very difficult to understand it – both its predicament and possibilities. Man-eater of Manatu and bonded labourers of Palamu do not and cannot provide you with a correct picture of Bihar. Both these types are, at best, peripheral and devoid of any historical initiative. ....

[This article is somewhat abridged version of the paper presented in the workshop (8-11 February, 1991) sponsored by the Land Reform Unit of the Lal Bahadur Shastri National Academy of Administration, Mussoorie. The workshop was held at A N Sinha Institute of Social Studies, Patna. This article is now compiled in the book, ‘Land Reforms in India’, Volume I, edited by B N Yugandhar and K G Iyer, Sage Publications, New Delhi, 1993.]
​
 

​