LAND = धरती माँ, THEN WHY NOT WOMEN?

 

 

LAND = धरती माँ, THEN WHY NOT WOMEN?

 

Well, let’s talk about “Women & Land Reforms” in India.

 

The irony of the prevalent situation stands out to be in the title prominently, describing not only the gender discrimination evident in India but also the idiosyncrasy ubiquitous within the roots of women of the country. The much-discussed Hindu Succession Amendment Act, 2005 and Land Reforms have focused on the rights of women to hold property, but before that, there are myriad questions that need to be answered to comprehend the picture at large, such as how much land in India are owned by women? What is the type of land (i.e., NA:  Non-Agricultural Land or Agricultural Land)?  What is the type of tenure? What is the size and fertility of the land? Such questions define the economic power and social status of women and also answer the required vicissitudes in the paradigm. Presently, by the National Family Health Survey- 4 men’s landholding on an average is 1.1 ha while women land holding is 0.9 ha on an average. This gap is the rumination of the lack of bargaining power of the women which has a positive correlation with domestic (natal as well as marital) violence.

 

The Hindu Succession Act, 1956 implicated biased clauses such as:

a)        Inherited agricultural land was unequally distributed among men and women

b)        Coparcenary rights were denied to daughters. Mitakshara School of Hindu Law was ratified which acknowledged only men as legal heirs of the family property.

 

Even though Hindu Succession Amendment Act,2005 amended section 4 to bequeath coparcenary rights to daughters by birth, there is limited access of land to women. Mindset bestows the element of being progressive or regressive and albeit with the current status, a definite answer is not questionable, as there are women who apparently do not claim their rights on property to not sever relations with kin, and if women do not speak aloud no one will come forward to give their rights in a platter.

 

To touch upon the roots and the largest share of India, 85% of the rural women workforce is a part of agriculture. Today, women have become the de-facto head of rural households due to reasons like migration, the suicide of farmers, abandonment, ‘de-peasantisation’ due to economic pressure, and many more in the count. “Feminising Agriculture” is a trend now as a corollary of migration and it has been justified by the 2011 census where it was recorded that the female population working in agriculture has augmented from 49.5 million to 61.6 million. When this trend is moving upwards there are ought to be a cynical factor pulling it down and, in this case, it stands out to be the antonym of ‘feminisation’ which is ‘defeminisation’. Defeminisation means encroaching on the rights of women to entitlements, these include denying access to agricultural schemes, credit facilities (Kisan credit cards), irrigation facilities, insurance, etc.

 

To counter such socio-economic imbalances and inequalities government had initiated Land Reforms Bill (2013) which to date remains to be a draft. The draft proposed myriad measures like:

a)   Recognising sole claim of women in land distribution schemes of government instead of joint title ownership with husbands.

 

b)  Incentives to be provided such as, adopt a “group approach”, recognizing women’s groups, and providing 50% low-interest loan facility and 50% grant.

 

c) The Ministry of Women and Child Development in collaboration with Development of Land Resources to the proctor to implementation of HSAA,2005.

d)    Land pattas offered to forest communities should be equally divided, i.e., 50% of it should be given to women under all land enactments even the ones mentioned in Scheduled Tribes Bills, 2005.

 

The desolation arises when such quintessential bills remain as drafts and fail to be pioneering epitomes of the much-required changes in society and laws.

 

Out of 28 states and 8 union territories in India Karnataka, Andhra Pradesh, Tamil Nadu and, Maharashtra adopted the HSAA,2005 and extended coparcenary rights to daughters while Kerala dropped the joint family ownership of property. Maharashtra in 2007, propagated land ownership by women through a campaign called MASUM where an initiative was taken to convert the sole house ownership to joint ownership between husbands and wives with the term “GharDoghanche”. It was successful to create a small change with 9000 households.  Under Women Farmers Entitlements Bill, 2011, women were issued Women Farmers Certificate which is a much-needed step towards reforms as when women are recognized as farmers, they hold an economic and bargaining power and the confidence for public participation. Research and probability data show that with an increase in the bargaining power of women, domestic violence against women has been drastically reduced from 49% to 7%. Swamitva Scheme launched by the Ministry of Panchayati Raj upholds the rights of women’s joint ownership in inhabited rural lands.  

 

Effective, momentous, and robust steps are required if not humungous in the right direction to change the prerogative of land ownership from ‘il-signore’(men) to ‘signora’(women). If requisite steps are taken, then Agricultural Census 2015-16 data of 60% women force of agriculture yet owning 13.96% of land can be altered optimistically in the ascendant direction. Supreme Court of the country, the apex judicial institute of India can prove to be an exemplar and trailblazer for Women and Land Reforms by effective judgments (unlike by Allahabad High Court which ruled out HSAA,2005 on the façade of the supremacy of state revenue codes as land ownership is a state subject).

 

In finality, tremendous growth in feminisation of agriculture should be supplemented with a tremendous increase in land ownership by women to equalize the socio-economic imbalance and bring about a revolution in the status of women. It is necessary for women to say “SADDA HAQ ETHE RAKH” for society to see “PICTURE ABHI BAAKI HAI MERE DOST!”.

 

 

Authors

 Ms. Ariba Atique Sayed (1212210043)                      

Ms. Rijul Jhadav  (1212210023)                          

Ms. Ketaki Gaikwad (1212210040)

 Ms. P S Tejashree  (1212210033)                                        \

Mr. Sanmay Kumar (1212210039)

 Research Scholar’s, 

M.Sc. Economics

Dr. Vishwanath Karad MIT-WPU

Co-Author:

Prof. Gaurav Petkar

Professor, School of Economics

Dr. Vishwanath Karad MIT-WPU