Khatiyan Of 1932: A Crucial Election Issue In Jharkhand Polls 2024

As voters in Jharkhand take part in the first phase of the state elections, one issue is generating significant debate across the capital, Ranchi: the "Khatiyan of 1932," or historical land records dating back to the British colonial era. This land record, originally compiled in 1932, continues to be a focal point in the state's socio-political landscape, influencing both policy and identity.

OneIndia correspondent spoke with Devendra Ji, a Ranchi resident, to understand why the Khatiyan remains such a contentious topic and how it affects the diverse communities of Jharkhand, including recent migrants and long-established minorities.

Devendra explains that the Khatiyan of 1932 dates back to British rule, when land records across India were last systematically updated. For Jharkhand, these records are embedded within two key laws: the Chhota Nagpur Tenancy (CNT) Act and the Santhal Pargana Tenancy (SPT) Act. Both acts protect the rights of those recognized in the 1932 records, who consider themselves the region's indigenous inhabitants. This has created a complex situation in which those without ancestral ties documented in the 1932 records may be excluded.

"There are three main issues with this," Devendra explains. "First, Jharkhand's population includes migrants like Sikhs, Punjabis, and Bengalis-many of whom arrived after Partition or from Bangladesh. Since these groups don't have land records dating back to 1932, they are often excluded from claims of local status under the Khatiyan. This affects their identity and rights in Jharkhand."

A second complication arises from Ranchi's role as the state capital. According to Devendra, the Capital City Development Act could, in theory, override tenancy protections, allowing Ranchi to expand and develop as a capital city. However, government officials have yet to repeal the 1932 land records in Ranchi, creating an awkward balance between protecting historical land rights and enabling the city's growth as a modern capital.

The third issue is the lack of clear policy direction. Political parties have frequently discussed the Khatiyan of 1932, but no party has committed to a solution that addresses how the land record should accommodate the needs of minority communities and recent settlers. "To this day," Devendra says, "no party has offered a plan in their manifesto on how to adapt the Khatiyan for minorities."

Devendra likens the situation to the poignant story of Toba Tek Singh by Saadat Hasan Manto, where characters exist in a "No Man's Land," stranded without resolution. "If we come to our country as refugees, settle here, and are still treated as outsiders, what is the meaning of our existence?"

As Jharkhand voters head to the polls, the Khatiyan of 1932 remains a "million-dollar question," underscoring a deeper conflict of identity and belonging in a rapidly evolving state.