3. Reorganisation of Agriculture

This step again has many inter-related and highly logical provisions in the direction of rational agrarian reforms:

(i) Redistribution of land among the landless poor masses after promulgating timely ceiling laws—the move failed badly with few exceptions, such as West Bengal, Kerala and partially in Andhra Pradesh.

(ii) Consolidation of land could only succeed in the regions of the Green Revolution (i.e., Haryana, Punjab and western Uttar Pradesh) and remained marred with many loopholes and corruption.

(iii) Cooperative farming, which has a high socio-economic moral base, was only used by the big farmers to save their lands from the draconian ceiling laws.

The whole attempt of land reforms in India is considered a big failure by majority of experts. Many consider the issue of land reforms in India as the most complex socio-economic problem of human history.15 Data regarding the numerical achievements of land reforms have been highly discouraging.16‌

(i) Tenancy reforms provided tenants with rights, but only on 4 per cent of the total operated areas in the country (14.4 million hectares of operated area by 11 million tenants by 1992).

(ii) Redistribution of ownership rights of land took place, but only upto 2 per cent of the total operated area in the country (less than 2 million hectares among the 4.76 million people by 1992).

(iii) Taken together, the whole process of land reforms could benefit only 6 per cent of the operated area of the country with a negligible socio-

economic positive impact.

It was the failure of land reforms which made the government easily attracted towards the new policy of the Green Revolution in the coming times

—land reforms had failed to increase agricultural production, thus the government opted for the route of increasing, productivity to reach the same goal, i.e., initiation of new techniques of agriculture.

Reasons for Failure of Land Reforms

Out of the many reasons forwarded by the experts responsible for the failure of the land reforms in India, the following three could be considered the most important ones:

(i) Land in India is considered a symbol of social prestige, status and identity unlike the other economies which succeeded in their land reform programmes, where it is seen as just an economic asset for income- earning.

(ii) Lack of political will which was required to affect land reforms and make it a successful programme.

(iii) Rampant corruption in public life, political hypocricy and leadership failure in the Indian democratic system.

Land Reforms & Green Revolution

Once the government launched the Green Revolution, the issue of land reforms almost got marginalised due to the following reasons:

(i) There is an inherent diabolic relationship between the Green Revolution and the land reforms as the former suits bigger and economic land holdings, while the latter intended to fragment the land among a large number of the masses.

(ii) The land reforms were socially opposed by the land-owning caste lobbies, while there was no such opposition to the Green Revolution.

(iii) The level of legislative attempts taken by the governments regarding the land reforms till date had almost no positive socio-economic impact on the country, while the Green Revolution was having all potential of

proving higher yields of foodgrains.

(iv) The subsidised supplies of foodgrains under PL480 were hampering India from carving out its independent diplomacy, as well as there has always remained a doubt about the regular supplies of wheat.

(v) International pressure as well as the suggestions from the World Bank besides the success stories of the Green Revolution from the countries where it had increased the yield of wheat.