How Manipur Land Tenure System is made complicated

The issue of land reforms in the hills had been made complicated over the years by some powerful lobbies by spicing it with wrong notions.

ByIFP Bureau

Updated 3 Apr 2023, 6:42 am

Manipur (Photo: IFP)
Manipur (Photo: IFP)


The government had notified that no new recognition would be given to villages having less than 50 households, while also suggesting a separate land holding system in the hill areas as the idea of a common land law for the state had been rejected by certain groups.

The Tribal and Hill Affairs Minister had also mooted the idea of a land survey under TA and Hills Department for verifying land boundaries in the hill areas and to have a clarity land holding system in Manipur.

It is good that some among the hill leaders have come forward in support of a land tenure system in the hills.

The question of land reforms has always been a problem in the state of Manipur, with certain groups always raising hell over the extension of Manipur Land Revenue and Land Reforms Act, 1960 in the hill areas.

Although it is awkward to have separate land laws within the boundaries of a single state we have also been advocating a separate land law for the hills in the interest of hill people.

The lack of land reforms in the hills had always been an obstacle to proper land-use policy and the overall development and welfare of the common people for lack of individual land ownership rights.


Certain vested interest groups have created a wrong notion about land reforms and for that matter, land survey.

Land survey does not necessarily mean the surveyed land would be taken over by the government. It is basically about determination of the area of land owned by each individual and recording of the land owners’ names and other details.

The issue of land reforms in the hills had been made very complicated over the years by some powerful lobbies by spicing it with wrong notions of indigenous land rights, an imagined threat perception of the valley people coming to settle in the hills, and of course flavours of sentiment while all the time side-lining the rights of common people in the hills with regard to individual land ownership.

Perhaps, Manipur must be the only state in India which has more than one land-holding system in practice.

While the whole of valley area and some parts in the hill districts are covered by the Manipur Land Revenue and Land Reforms Act 1960, there are two land ownership systems in the hills.

In the Kuki areas, all of the village land is owned by the chief and the villagers are his tenants living under his patronage, who are given temporary rights for tilling the land on the condition that a portion of the produce should be given to the chief, the landowner.

It is simply because of this factor that new villages keep cropping up in Kuki dominated areas as the brothers of the chief wants a slice of the pie.

While there is both community and individual ownership in most of the Naga areas, the ownership is not a part of the state land records system.


In the lack of collateral in terms of official individual land ownership, banks are often reluctant to give loans to individuals or infrastructural support to hill based entrepreneurs, thereby stunting individual growth and development.

In 1988, the then Chief Minister RK Jaichandra had introduced an Amendment Bill of the Act of 1960 seeking to extend the provisions of the Act to the entire state of Manipur, including the hill areas to enable the Revenue department to make survey and prepare records of rights in respect of the permanently settled areas, wet land rice cultivated areas.

The bill was vehemently opposed by the representatives of the hill areas in the Manipur Legislative Assembly. It was projected as an anti-tribal bill by the powerful lobbies active in the hills, which are basically composed of the tribal elite and the powerful chiefs.

The iron hand grip over hill sentiment and sway over the hill people of these lobbies was clearly evident in the 2015 agitation against the three bills relating to regulation of non-locals in the state of Manipur, in Churachandpur district.

What they conveniently chose to ignore was the fact that the MLR and LR Act was already operative in Churachandpur town and parts of Khuga valley. It was simply because of the extension of the state land tenure system that Churachandpur became the second largest and flourishing town in the state.

The extension was made possible by the 1988 Amendment of the Act, where a proviso was added to extend the whole or any part of any section of this Act to any of the hill areas of Manipur also by an executive order.

Read More IFP Editorial


First published:


land conflictmanipur hillsmlrlr actrevenue landmanipur valleymanipur land tenure system

IFP Bureau

IFP Bureau

IMPHAL, Manipur


Top Stories

Loading data...

IFP Exclusive

Loading data...