Uttarakhand enforces stringent law restricting sale of land after governor approves
The Uttarakhand state assembly and the cabinet passed the stringent amendments to the land law in February this year.
'With this law, the uncontrolled sale of agricultural and horticultural land in Uttarakhand has been completely banned, aligning with the sentiments of the people. For purposes such as residential use, education, hospitals, hotels, and industries, individuals from other states will now need to follow a strict process and meet the standards set by the law,' chief minister Pushkar Singh Dhami said.
He said that the law is a 'preventive measure' against demographic shifts in the region. 'The implementation of this strict land law will curb attempts to alter the state's demographic composition. I thank the Governor for approving this crucial legislation, which reinforces Uttarakhand's cultural and social identity,' said Dhami, adding actions are being taken against the people violating the provisions of the Land Act.
Also Read:U'khand cabinet approves new land law; sale of agricultural land to outsiders banned
'A comprehensive campaign is being run and such lands are being vested in the state government,' he said.
The new legislation, formally titled 'Uttarakhand (Uttar Pradesh Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, 1950) (Amendment) Act, 2025', permits non-residents to purchase only 250 square metres of residential land, with strict one-purchase-per-family restrictions. Only two districts - Haridwar and Udham Singh Nagar - are exempt from the new restrictions, though sales there will require state government approval rather than district-level authorisation.
All district magistrates will have to submit reports related to land purchase to the state revenue council and the state government. The land falling under the municipal limits can be used only according to the prescribed land use. If a person uses the land against the rules, then that land will be vested in the government.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Hans India
15 minutes ago
- Hans India
Ex-MLA booked for breaching ‘No politics in Tirumala' rule
Tirumala: Tirumala police have registered a case against former YSRCP MLA and former CM YS Jagan Mohan Reddy's maternal uncle P Ravindranath Reddy for allegedly making political statements in Tirumala, in violation of the Tirumala Tirupati Devasthanams (TTD) board's resolution banning political speeches in the hill shrine. Reddy had visited the Lord Venkateswara temple on Sunday for darshan and later addressed the media outside the shrine. During the interaction, he reportedly criticised the ruling coalition and spoke about political developments in Kadapa district, including the Pulivendula ZPTC by-election. The TTD board, in a recent decision, prohibited political speeches and allegations within Tirumala to protect the sanctity of the temple. This ban applies to all public representatives and visitors alike. Following a written complaint from Vigilance Inspector V Damodar, Tirumala One Town police registered Crime No 47/2025 under Section 223 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) Act. Police said they are reviewing the footage of Reddy's remarks. Sources indicated that a notice could soon be served to the former MLA, asking him to explain why legal action should not proceed for breaching the 'no politics in Tirumala' rule.
Indian Express
15 minutes ago
- Indian Express
Dr. Payal Tadvi suicide: HC slams Maha govt over SPP removal, seeks to know if he wishes to return
The Bombay High Court on Monday questioned the Maharashtra government over the manner in which erstwhile Special Public Prosecutor (SPP) Pradip Gharat was removed from the trial in the case related suicide of Dr Payal Tadvi in 2019, allegedly due to harassment by her seniors. The court asked the government lawyer to check with Gharat and inform if he was willing to come back to represent the state as SPP in the case. A bench of Justices Ravindra V Ghuge and Gautam Ankhad was hearing plea by Abeda Tadvi, mother of late Payal, who had challenged the March 7, 2025 notification issued by state law and judiciary department that removed Gharat as SPP with immediate effect and appointed another lawyer Mahesh Mule. The mother alleged that the decision was 'arbitrary and illegal' and will lead to delay in trial and risk of losing crucial evidence' and violative of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. Payal's three seniors at TN Topiwala National Medical College and BYL Nair Hospital Dr Bhakti Mehare, Dr Ankita Khandelwal and Dr Hema Ahuja are named as accused in the case. Gharat in February had filed an application before sessions court to add the then head of gynaecology department at the Hospital Dr Yi Ching Ling as accused for overlooking the harassment and ragging complaint by Tadvi. The trial court on February 28 ordered Ling's addition as an accused in abetment of suicide case. 'It is very easy to say that the public has great trust in the judiciary. These are testing times These are examples where it is tested. Now the impression of the petitioner is, for some reason, because Mr. Gharat acted strictly, he was removed. When order comes in your favour, Gharat is back and when order is adverse, Gharat is removed,' Justice Ghuge orally remarked. Additional Public Prosecutor (APP) SV Gavand for the government submitted that the state government was well within its right and domain to take a decision of removal and claimed that Gharat's appointment too was made by state on its own and not at the mother's instance. However, advocate Lara Jesai for the petitioner mother denied the same and submitted that she too had filed an application for his appointment. The bench expressed displeasure over the justification given by the government to remove Gharat as SPP and said that the same was 'not in a good taste'. The judges questioned the government lawyer, 'Gharat is a seasoned prosecutor. Such a senior advocate who has worked so hard for the state, got you (state government) so many convictions… He put so much hard work in that journalist's (J Dey murder) case. That time he was nice… Entire trial was conducted by him and you got a conviction for nine accused. Who is this officer who writes like this? Therefore, the petitioner wants us to scrutinise the decision (to remove Gharat as SPP) because her faith in the law is shaken.' 'We know it is in your domain but should be done judiciously,' the HC remarked. 'Show him what is written (justification for removal) and make an impression whether he would want to come back,' it told APP Gavand. The court also sought to know who had made an application for Gharat's removal as SPP in January, and along with the file of such correspondence and posted further hearing to August 13.
Hindustan Times
15 minutes ago
- Hindustan Times
Declaration mandatory before religious conversion: Panipat DC
Citing the Haryana Prevention of Unlawful Conversion of Religion Act and Rules, 2022, Panipat deputy commissioner (DC) Virender Kumar Dahiya said on Monday that any person intending to convert religion will have to submit a declaration in Form 'A' to his office before conversion. Panipat deputy commissioner (DC) Virender Kumar Dahiya said on Monday that any person intending to convert religion will have to submit a declaration in Form 'A' to his office before conversion. (HT File) He said that the government's orders are being effectively implemented in the district and the administration is in alert mode to ensure that the rules are not violated in any way. 'In case of minors, both surviving parents are required to submit a declaration in Form 'B'. Additionally, any religious priest or person organising a conversion ceremony has to give prior notice in Form 'C' to the DC office where conversion is planned. On receipt of such declarations or notifications, the DC will acknowledge them by issuing a receipt from the office, thereby ensuring formal documentation and transparency of the conversion process,' an official statement read. Further, the DC said that the Act provides that within thirty days of display of the notice, any person may lodge objections in writing and on receipt of such objections, there is a power to conduct thorough verification and investigation as per the rules. 'If after investigation, it is found that the proposed conversion is in violation of the Act, such as the use of force, fraud, coercion or other prohibited means, there is a power to refuse permission for conversion by issuing a detailed and reasoned order,' he added. 'Objective to protect citizens, not to interfere with their freedom' The DC further said that the government's objective is not to interfere with individual religious freedom but to protect citizens from fraud, coercion or unlawful inducement as the Act prohibits any person from converting or attempting to convert another person from one religion to another by means of misrepresentation, use of force, threat, undue influence, allurement or fraudulent means (including digital means). It also prohibits conversion by marriage or for the sake of marriage. Up to 5 years jail for 'illegal conversion' Dahiya also said that illegal conversion is punishable with imprisonment of one to five years and a fine of at least ₹1 lakh. If a person conceals his religion to get married, he can be imprisoned for three to 10 years and fined at least ₹3 lakh. He said the Act also provides that any marriage performed in violation of the provision of concealing one's religion for marriage shall be deemed void, while any child born from such a marriage shall be deemed legitimate and his property shall be inherited according to the inheritance laws of his parents. 'Converting a minor, woman or a person belonging to Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe is punishable with imprisonment of four to ten years and fine of at least ₹3 lakh. Mass conversion, defined as conversion of more than two persons at the same time, is punishable with imprisonment of five to 10 years and fine of least ₹4 lakh,' the statement read.
