Former Tripura Law Secretary Data Mohan Jamatia said TTAADC’s ‘land rights’ must be clearly defined, requiring amendments to the Tripura Land Revenue and Land Records Act by the state legislature.
Former Tripura Law Secretary and Registrar General of the Tripura High Court, Data Mohan Jamatia, has said that the ongoing political and constitutional debate over granting “land rights” to the Tripura Tribal Areas Autonomous District Council (TTAADC) requires a clear legal definition and cannot be resolved without intervention by the state legislature.
Jamatia made the remarks while analysing the issue during a podcast hosted by online media platform Tripurainfo. He explained the constitutional and legal provisions governing land under the Sixth Schedule and said that autonomous district councils do not inherently possess the power to legislate on the transfer of land titles.
According to Jamatia, the phrase “land rights” has become a politically significant issue, but it has not yet been defined in precise terms that can eliminate ambiguity. He said that, based on the demands being raised by political parties, the TTAADC appears to be seeking ownership or control over Khas land situated within the protected areas under the Sixth Schedule.
He further indicated that the demand also involves empowering the autonomous council to transfer land for the purpose of allotment.
Explaining the provisions of the Sixth Schedule, Jamatia said Paragraph 3 contains an exhaustive list of subjects on which an autonomous district council can make laws. These subjects include land, customs, inheritance, marriage and chieftainship, among others.
However, he pointed out that the provisions relating to land specifically refer to three functions—“allotment, occupation and use”—and argued that these powers should not automatically be interpreted as including the power to transfer ownership or title of land.
Jamatia referred to a Supreme Court ruling concerning laws enacted by the Khasi and Jaintia autonomous district councils. According to him, the apex court had clarified that the expression “allotment” under the Sixth Schedule does not extend to the power to transfer the title of land.
He also stated that similar legislation concerning land passed by other autonomous district councils in the northeastern states had subsequently been declared void by competent courts.
Against this legal backdrop, Jamatia said the most practical route for empowering the TTAADC to manage Khas land would involve amendments to the Tripura Land Revenue and Land Records Act, 1960.
He specifically referred to Sections 11 and 14 of the TLR&LR Act, saying the provisions deal with the ownership of land and the procedure governing allotment. Since the Act was enacted by the Tripura state legislature, he said the legislature has the authority to amend the relevant provisions and establish a legal mechanism through which the TTAADC could exercise greater control over Khas land.
Jamatia outlined two possible approaches. The first would be to transfer the power of allotment directly to the TTAADC administration. The second would be to make it mandatory for district collectors to make land allotments based on recommendations made by the autonomous district council.
He stressed that the question of land allotment powers for the TTAADC was not a recent development, describing it as a longstanding issue that has remained a subject of political debate and confusion.
“The debate is old,” Jamatia explained, adding that uncertainty surrounding the issue had existed within political circles from the beginning.
Apart from land rights, Jamatia also discussed the demand for direct funding to the TTAADC. On this issue, he maintained that the existing constitutional and legal framework does not allow the Union government to directly transfer funds to the autonomous district council while bypassing the state government.
He said that, under the present system, the state government is responsible for passing the budget for the TTAADC. The district council can submit a budget-like proposal to the Tribal Welfare Department and the state government, after which funds are allocated according to the government’s financial capacity.
Jamatia, however, did not completely rule out the possibility of direct funding in the future. He pointed out that Parliament has the constitutional power to amend the Sixth Schedule. If such an amendment were made and the TTAADC were granted a status comparable to that of a state, direct funding could become legally possible.
Until such a constitutional change takes place, he said, direct funding from the Centre to the TTAADC would not be possible under the existing framework.
Jamatia’s analysis comes amid continued political discussion in Tripura over the implementation of demands related to the TTAADC, particularly land rights, administrative powers and financial autonomy. His remarks highlight the need to distinguish between constitutional powers available to an autonomous district council under the Sixth Schedule and powers that may require specific changes to state legislation.
| Also Read: Tripura CM inspects Agartala fish market, calls for better cleanliness measures |
The former Law Secretary’s observations also underline that any move to provide the TTAADC with wider authority over land allotment would require a clearly defined legal framework to avoid conflict between the Sixth Schedule, existing state land laws and judicial interpretations.
The issue of land rights therefore remains closely linked to both constitutional provisions and the legislative powers of the Tripura government, with any substantive change likely to require formal legal intervention rather than political declarations alone.
