A village in Himachal which is still ‘part of Punjab’

Lalit Mohan

It would be 47 years in January next year since Himachal became the 18th state of India in 1971. Una — former tehsil of Hoshiarpur district of Punjab — was included in Himachal and made a district. However, a village located just 1 km from the district headquarters of Una is still a part of Hoshiarpur district of Punjab in revenue records.

Successive governments have failed to make small correction in the revenue record of the Lal Singhi village that could have made them residents of Himachal.

As per the ‘farad’ (revenue paper indicating ownership of land) issued to villagers by the revenue officials, the Lal Singhi village is still located in Hoshiarpur district of Punjab.

Residents of the village can’t sell their land, as the original record of the village was lost after Una was merged in Himachal. Not only this, even after more than 47 years of formation of state, they have not been able to either divide their land or get it demarcated.

In the recent past, the government allowed the registries of land in the village. However, still the mutations of sold land have not been affected as the original record is not available. Since the land has also not been divided between families, frequent disputes mar the development of the area.

After the villagers raised a lot of hue and cry over the issue, the previous government made efforts to locate the record. Revenue officials’ teams were sent to Hoshiarpur district to locate the old records. However, the record could not be traced. Thereafter, a new record was prepared. However, the newly prepared record was not accepted or implemented.

The present government also issued directions to prepare the record of village as per the actual occupations. However, the officials of the settlement office apprehend that this also might not solve the problem. They said the actual possessions are already disputed in the village. It is necessary to take the consent of residents before making ground possession permanent, pending which litigation regarding land would only pile up.

Despite all work in progress, it is unfortunate that the Himachal Government or the officials of Revenue Department have not been able to prepare new record of just about 3,600 hectare land in the village to settle the problem of residents. The five-decade delay to the problem can be attributed to the inefficiency of the revenue officials or their unwillingness to resolve the issue as it makes people dependent on them.

Settlement officials here blame the first Deputy Commissioner of Una for failing to procure the record of the village from Hoshiarpur.

The lack of record is also leading to encroachments in government lands in the village. Had the record of village been available, the government could have revived the old Una-Amb road, sources in the village said.

A Lal Singhi resident said if they were part of Hoshiarpur district, then Section 118 of the Tenancy and Land Reforms Act, 1972, that bars Himachal agriculturists to sell land to outsiders should not be applied to them.

Villagers at the receiving end

• As per the 'farad' (revenue paper indicating ownership of land) issued to villagers by the revenue officials, the Lal Singhi village is still located in Hoshiarpur district of Punjab.
• Residents of the village can't sell their land, as the original record of the village was lost after Una was merged in Himachal. Not only this, even after more than 47 years of formation of the state, they have not been able to either divide their land or get it demarcated.
• In the recent past, the government allowed the registries of land in the village. However, still the mutations of sold land have not been affected as the original record is not available. Since the land has also not been divided between families, frequent disputes mar the development of the area.
• The previous government made efforts to locate the record. Revenue officials' teams were sent to Hoshiarpur district to locate the old records. However, the record could not be traced. Thereafter, a new record was prepared. However, the newly prepared record was not accepted or implemented.
• The present government also issued directions to prepare the record of village as per the actual occupations. However, the officials of the settlement office apprehend that this also might not solve the problem. They said the actual possessions are already disputed in the village. It is necessary to take the consent of residents before making ground possession permanent, pending which litigation regarding land would only pile up.