J&K Govt Bars Renewal of Expired State, Nazool Land Leases: What the Assembly Disclosure Means
By: News Desk | 22 September 2026
Srinagar: A seemingly technical land question in the Jammu and Kashmir Legislative Assembly has opened up a much larger issue over who can continue occupying government land, what happens when an old lease expires and whether long-standing commercial properties can simply be renewed under the new legal framework.
The Jammu and Kashmir government has told the Assembly that expired State and Nazool land leases cannot be renewed under the Jammu and Kashmir Land Grants Rules, 2022, citing Rule 12 of the Rules.
The disclosure came in response to a question from Peoples Conference MLA Sajad Gani Lone and comes days after authorities issued eviction notices to occupants of several government properties in Srinagar whose leases had expired.
The government said 80 lease cases had expired during the period of the erstwhile state of Jammu and Kashmir. It added that no record of expired lease cases was available in Anantnag, while Srinagar had the highest number, although the exact number could not be ascertained.
The disclosure has brought fresh attention to the 2022 Land Grants Rules, a framework that significantly changed how government land is to be leased and what happens when older leases come to an end.
For commercial occupants, the implications are potentially substantial.
What Exactly Has the Government Told the Assembly?
The government’s response contains several separate pieces of information.
First, it has confirmed that expired State and Nazool land leases covered by the 2022 framework cannot simply be renewed.
Second, it has acknowledged 80 expired lease cases dating from the period when Jammu and Kashmir was still a state.
Third, the government has said Srinagar accounts for the largest number of such expired cases, although the exact figure was not available in its records.
Fourth, it has provided a broad inventory of government-owned land, including nearly one crore kanal of State land and 9,877 kanal and 3.5 marlas of Nazool land according to the figures placed before the House.
Finally, the government disclosed that land leased for commercial purposes before 2019 covered 531 kanal and 16 marlas in the Jammu division and 5,088 kanal and 6 marlas in the Kashmir division, making a combined 5,619 kanal and 22 marlas.
These figures give the Assembly debate a much wider dimension.
The issue is not confined to a handful of properties in Srinagar. It concerns a sizeable portfolio of government land that has historically been occupied under different lease arrangements.
Rule 12 Is the Centre of the Dispute
The critical provision is Rule 12 of the Jammu and Kashmir Land Grants Rules, 2022.
The Rules were notified in December 2022 under the Jammu and Kashmir Land Grants Act, 1960. The framework replaced the earlier 1960 rules and changed the treatment of expired leases.
Rule 12 states that, except for subsisting or expired residential leases, leases granted under the earlier 1960 framework, certain tourism-related rules and leases that had already expired or been determined before the 2022 Rules came into force shall not be renewed and shall stand determined.
It also provides for such land to be put to auction under the new rules.
That wording is important.
It means that an old commercial lease cannot be treated simply as a continuing right that can be extended whenever the lessee seeks renewal.
Once the lease falls within the rule and expires, the government’s stated framework is to take back the land and determine its future use through the mechanism prescribed under the new rules.
There Is an Important Residential Exception
The phrase “expired leases cannot be renewed” needs one qualification.
The 2022 Rules specifically carve out subsisting and expired residential leases from their general applicability, with a separate policy contemplated for such properties.
Therefore, the government’s position in the Assembly should not be read as meaning that every expired lease of every kind of government land is automatically treated identically.
The more immediate issue concerns the commercial and other non-residential leases to which the determination provisions apply.
That distinction becomes particularly important in Srinagar, where government-owned properties have historically been used for shops, markets, offices, hotels and other commercial establishments.
What Happens After an Old Lease Expires?
The 2022 framework goes beyond simply saying that renewal is unavailable.
The Rules provide that outgoing lessees, with the residential exception, are required to hand over possession. If they fail to do so, eviction can follow under the Jammu and Kashmir Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) Act, 1988.
The rules also address improvements and structures.
For older leases, the framework provides for payment for eligible improvements or structures, subject to the conditions prescribed in the Rules and provided the lessee has not violated the lease conditions.
For leases granted under the new framework, however, the treatment is different, with structures and improvements subject to the specific provisions of the new lease arrangement.
In practical terms, the government’s approach is therefore based on a transition:
old lease expires → possession returns to government → land is considered under the new framework → fresh lease, where appropriate, is granted according to the prescribed process.
Rule 6 Opens Another Door
The Assembly response also referred to Rule 6, which provides for an Empowered Committee to identify and designate land and determine the purpose for which government land may be granted on lease.
This is significant because the policy is not simply about taking land back.
The government retains the ability to identify land for new purposes and lease it under the 2022 framework.
The Rules list a broad range of permissible purposes, including education, healthcare, tourism, agriculture and allied activities, skill development, traditional arts and crafts, infrastructure, industries, employment generation and several other public or economic uses.
The framework also envisages auction-based allotment.
That is a substantial departure from the older system, under which government land could remain tied to long-running lease arrangements for decades.
Srinagar’s Eviction Notices Put the Policy Into Practice
The Assembly disclosure comes at a particularly sensitive moment.
In September, authorities issued eviction notices to occupants of government properties in several prominent Srinagar localities, including Polo View, Lal Chowk, Karan Nagar and Rajbagh, citing expired leases, rent defaults or violations of lease conditions.
One notice reported by The Telegraph stated that the occupants had produced an original lease but had failed to establish the existence of a subsisting lease or a valid renewal or extension order from the competent authority.
Another notice cited failure to provide satisfactory justification for rent defaults and deviations from the original terms of the lease.
This is where the Assembly disclosure becomes particularly relevant.
The government’s position that expired leases cannot be renewed under Rule 12 provides the broader policy framework against which these eviction proceedings are taking place.
The individual occupants, however, may still have case-specific questions about their original lease documents, renewal applications, payments, improvements, litigation or other legal claims.
Those questions cannot automatically be settled merely by pointing to the existence of Rule 12.
The 2022 Rules Were Controversial From the Beginning
The present controversy is not new.
When the Land Grants Rules were notified in December 2022, they triggered concerns among sections of the business community and political parties.
The administration presented the framework as a way of ending long-running monopolies over government land, improving transparency and bringing land allotment under a more structured system.
Critics, meanwhile, argued that the changes could put established businesses and property holders at risk, particularly those operating on long-standing leases.
That disagreement remains relevant today.
The government’s argument centres on the ownership of the land.
A lease gives a person or entity a right to use property for a specified period and under specified conditions. It does not ordinarily convert the lessee into the owner of the underlying government land.
Once the agreed period ends, the question becomes whether a lawful mechanism exists to continue the occupation.
The 2022 Rules provide a clear answer for the categories covered by Rule 12: the old lease is not to be renewed.
But the Courts Have Shown Why Every Case May Need Its Own Examination
There is an important legal qualification to the broader policy debate.
A recent judgment of the Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court involving Nazool land illustrates that disputes over expired leases can involve complicated histories extending across several decades.
In Radha Krishan Koul v. Union Territory of J&K, decided by a Division Bench in 2026, the court examined a long-running dispute involving Nazool land in Srinagar. The case involved successive government orders, an old lease, an attempted regularisation under the erstwhile Roshni Act and later eviction proceedings.
The court’s findings were specific to the facts before it.
The judgment records that the lease in that case had been extended up to 2014 and that the occupants had challenged subsequent treatment of their property as unauthorised occupation. The court ultimately found that the particular appellants could not simply be treated as encroachers based on the history presented before it.
That judgment should not be read as cancelling Rule 12.
Rather, it illustrates a crucial point: the existence of a general land policy does not eliminate the need to examine the legal history of an individual lease.
Old government land records can contain extensions, government orders, payments, court proceedings and competing claims accumulated over decades.
The Roshni Act Legacy Complicates Some Nazool Cases
The history of Nazool land in Jammu and Kashmir cannot be separated entirely from the controversy surrounding the former Jammu and Kashmir State Lands (Vesting of Ownership to the Occupants) Act, 2001, commonly known as the Roshni Act.
The legislation attempted to confer ownership rights over certain categories of state land on occupants subject to prescribed conditions.
The Jammu and Kashmir High Court declared the Act unconstitutional in 2020, and subsequent legal proceedings have continued to deal with the consequences in individual cases.
The recent Radha Krishan Koul judgment demonstrates how complicated that legacy can become when a person originally held land through a lawful lease, later pursued ownership rights and subsequently faced eviction proceedings after the legal framework changed.
This history matters because not every occupant of government land is necessarily in the same legal position.
Some may have straightforward expired leases.
Others may have pending renewal applications.
Some may have litigation.
Others may have been covered by previous government orders or policies.
The government’s broad position on non-renewal therefore has to operate alongside the legal rights and remedies available in individual cases.
A Question of Transparency Also Emerges
The Assembly disclosure contains another revealing detail.
The government said Srinagar had the maximum number of expired lease cases but that the exact figure could not be ascertained.
That admission raises a practical governance question.
If the government is moving towards systematic retrieval and fresh allotment of leased land, the quality of the underlying land records becomes critical.
A modern land-management system would ideally allow the administration to identify, for every government lease:
- the original allotment date;
- the purpose of the lease;
- the original lease period;
- subsequent extensions or renewals;
- rent and premium paid;
- outstanding dues;
- current occupant;
- current land use;
- pending litigation;
- and the legal status of the property after expiry.
Without such a consolidated record, enforcement can become vulnerable to disputes over missing documents, competing government orders and inconsistent treatment.
The government’s inability to ascertain the exact number of expired cases in Srinagar is therefore more than a statistical footnote.
It points to the importance of completing and digitising the historical lease record before a large-scale land recovery exercise advances.
Why the Commercial Land Figures Matter
The government told the Assembly that pre-2019 commercial leases covered 5,619 kanal and 22 marlas across Jammu and Kashmir, with the Kashmir division accounting for the overwhelming share of the disclosed area.
These are not small holdings in aggregate.
The number illustrates why the 2022 Rules could have significant economic consequences.
A government decision to resume expired commercial leases can affect shopkeepers, traders, hotels, institutions and other businesses that have operated on such properties for years.
At the same time, the government has a legitimate administrative interest in ensuring that public land is not locked into outdated agreements indefinitely, particularly where leases have expired or contractual conditions have been breached.
The policy question is therefore not simply whether government land should be reclaimed.
It is how the transition is managed.
What Does Fresh Auction Mean for Existing Occupants?
For an existing commercial occupant, the central uncertainty is what happens after the old lease ends.
Under the 2022 Rules, expired leases covered by Rule 12 are not to be renewed and are to stand determined. The land can then be put to auction under the prescribed mechanism.
This potentially changes the relationship between the government and longstanding occupants.
An old lessee cannot assume that years of occupation automatically create a right to another lease.
At the same time, the government must follow the applicable legal process when recovering possession.
That includes consideration of valid documents, notices, statutory procedures and any judicial orders affecting a particular property.
The distinction between lease expiry and lawful eviction is therefore important.
An expired lease may mean the contractual right to occupy has ended. It does not mean that every dispute over possession can be resolved without following the applicable eviction procedure.
The Larger Question: Who Gets Government Land Next?
There is another question likely to surface as the policy develops.
If old commercial leases are not renewed and properties return to government control, how will they subsequently be allotted?
The 2022 Rules envisage auction-based leasing, while Rule 6 provides an institutional mechanism for identifying land and deciding the purposes for which it may be leased.
That creates the possibility of a more transparent, competitive system.
But it also places a heavy responsibility on the administration.
The public will want to know whether auctions are genuinely open and competitive, whether reserve prices reflect current market conditions, whether local businesses can compete, and how land-use conditions will be enforced after a new lease is granted.
These questions are likely to become increasingly important if more properties are resumed.
A Policy Shift With Economic and Social Consequences
The land-leasing issue may look technical from the perspective of revenue administration.
On the ground, it is anything but technical.
Government land in Srinagar and other urban centres is often located in commercially valuable areas. A lease dispute can therefore affect a functioning business, employees, tenants, property investments and surrounding economic activity.
For the government, meanwhile, public land is a finite asset.
If land remains occupied under expired agreements without a valid legal basis, the administration risks losing control over an important public resource.
The challenge is to reconcile those two realities.
The 2022 Rules provide the broad legal framework. The Assembly disclosure now shows that the administration intends to apply its non-renewal provisions to expired leases falling within that framework.
The next phase will determine how consistently and transparently that policy is implemented.
The Assembly Disclosure Could Be the Beginning of a Larger Land Debate
Sajad Gani Lone’s question has brought numbers and rules into the public domain at a moment when eviction notices are already being served in Srinagar.
That timing is significant.
The government has now publicly stated that 80 lease cases expired during the erstwhile state’s tenure, that Srinagar has the largest number among districts where records are available, and that expired non-residential leases covered by Rule 12 cannot simply be renewed.
But several questions remain.
How many of the 80 cases are commercial?
How many properties are currently occupied?
How many have pending litigation?
How many occupants have applied for renewal or extension?
What is the total current market value of the affected land?
How many properties will eventually be auctioned?
And, perhaps most importantly, will the government publish a complete, searchable database of these leases so that the public can understand how decisions are being made?
Those answers would give greater clarity to a policy that is already affecting valuable properties and long-established occupants.
For now, the message from the Assembly is clear: an expired government land lease is no longer automatically a ticket to renewal under the 2022 framework.
But the legal and administrative story does not end there.
The real test will be what happens to the land after the old lease ends, how due process is followed in individual cases, and whether the government’s new leasing system delivers the transparency and public accountability promised by the rules.
