LUCKNOW: When UP BJP chief Bhupendra Chaudhary, an MLC, referred the Nazul Property (Management and Use for Public Purpose) Bill 2024 tabled by his own governmentt in the assembly to a select committee of the Upper House, it was initially taken as another episode of govt vs organisation in UP. However, a close examination reveals that it was a well-coordinated move by BJP to blunt any opposition attack over the issue.
On March 7, 2024, Yogi government notified the ordinance which barred conversion of Nazul land into freehold in favour of a private person.The idea was to get back land grabbed by land mafia and others and from those who violated lease rules.
However, it gradually became apparent that its impact went well beyond land parcels occupied by land mafia. “For example, a major part of Prayagraj city has been settled on Nazul land,” said a BJP functionary. No wonder when the assembly passed the bill on Wednesday prominent among those who spoke against it were BJP MLAs from Prayagraj Siddharth Nath Singh and Harshvardhan Bajpayee. They were followed by Raja Bhaiyya (JD-L) and Aradhana Mishra (Cong), both MLAs from neighbouring Pratapgarh district. NDA partners also objected.
A BJP member told TOI that around 50,000 families were annoyed with the ordinance and this was one of the factors for the party losing the Allahabad Lok Sabha seat. “Resentment was brewing not only in Prayagraj but also in other districts,” said a BJP MLA. “The number of such Nazul land holders is in lakhs.”
BJP, already on the backfoot after the LS poll result, realised the bill may adversely impact its prospects in the upcoming bypolls. CM Yogi Adityanath, deputy CMs Keshav Maurya and Brajesh Pathak, state BJP chief Chaudhary and parliamentary affairs minister Suresh Khanna went into a huddle to find an honourable exit route.
A BJP MLA said the first step was to ensure it was passed in the lower House without offering SP an opportunity to protest. “The objections raised by BJP MLAs were part of this move,” he claimed. It was decided that in Vidhan Parishad, a BJP member should object to the bill and Chaudhary could refer it to the select committee. Asked why the bill was tabled when the ordinance itself was opposed, a BJP MLA said the protest was mainly limited to Prayagraj and surrounding areas. “It was thought that objections would be addressed through amendments,” he added.
On March 7, 2024, Yogi government notified the ordinance which barred conversion of Nazul land into freehold in favour of a private person.The idea was to get back land grabbed by land mafia and others and from those who violated lease rules.
However, it gradually became apparent that its impact went well beyond land parcels occupied by land mafia. “For example, a major part of Prayagraj city has been settled on Nazul land,” said a BJP functionary. No wonder when the assembly passed the bill on Wednesday prominent among those who spoke against it were BJP MLAs from Prayagraj Siddharth Nath Singh and Harshvardhan Bajpayee. They were followed by Raja Bhaiyya (JD-L) and Aradhana Mishra (Cong), both MLAs from neighbouring Pratapgarh district. NDA partners also objected.
A BJP member told TOI that around 50,000 families were annoyed with the ordinance and this was one of the factors for the party losing the Allahabad Lok Sabha seat. “Resentment was brewing not only in Prayagraj but also in other districts,” said a BJP MLA. “The number of such Nazul land holders is in lakhs.”
BJP, already on the backfoot after the LS poll result, realised the bill may adversely impact its prospects in the upcoming bypolls. CM Yogi Adityanath, deputy CMs Keshav Maurya and Brajesh Pathak, state BJP chief Chaudhary and parliamentary affairs minister Suresh Khanna went into a huddle to find an honourable exit route.
A BJP MLA said the first step was to ensure it was passed in the lower House without offering SP an opportunity to protest. “The objections raised by BJP MLAs were part of this move,” he claimed. It was decided that in Vidhan Parishad, a BJP member should object to the bill and Chaudhary could refer it to the select committee. Asked why the bill was tabled when the ordinance itself was opposed, a BJP MLA said the protest was mainly limited to Prayagraj and surrounding areas. “It was thought that objections would be addressed through amendments,” he added.