Owning lands and the sentiments that go with it

Land is considered such a precious position that, in the Mahabharat, when the Pandavas ask for five villages, one for each of them, the Kaurava Crown Prince Duryodhana refuses to give them even so much of land as occupied by the point of a pin.

There is, then, the other example of Lord Rama, who, after vanquishing Ravana, is requested by Vibhishana, brother of Ravana to rule Lanka. Rama famously replies that ‘Mother and Motherland’ are more important than even Heaven, and he would like to return to Ayodhya.

The sense of deep attachment to Motherland and the long drawn, and frequently violent, conflicts that can arise when there is more than one claimant to the same land is best illustrated by today’s Israel.

The Israeli – Palestine dispute traces back to the late 19th century when Zionists sought to establish a homeland for the Jewish people in the Ottoman-controlled Palestine.

After the Ottoman Empire lost the First World War, the British received a mandate to manage Palestine and promised the Jewish people a country. That country, today’s Israel, declared independence in 1948. The creation of Israel remains a highly debated and sensitive issue, not susceptible straight answer. While there are those who maintain that it was necessary in order to facilitate self – determination by the Jews after centuries of prosecution, and the other contention is that it has led to displacement and disposition of Palestinians and a continuing conflict.

Another significant example of how countries value ownership of land relates to the interesting history of Alaska, which began with the Russian colonisation in the 18th century, and culminated in its sale to the United States in 1867, following America’s acceptance of Russia’s offer for a $7.2 million settlement at that time.

Coming to India, disputes regarding ownership of areas near the borders of states are quite common.

Even after the lapse of close to seven decades after the event, a few hotspots of discontent and struggles continue to exist following the formation of states in 1956 on a linguistic basis.

The primary border dispute between Odisha and Andhra Pradesh, for instance, centres on the Kotia region, a group of 21 villages in the Eastern Ghats hills. Both states claim these villages, with Andhra Pradesh asserting their inclusion in Parvathipuram-Manyam district, and Odisha claiming them as part of Koraput district. The dispute has been ongoing for decades, particularly after Andhra Pradesh laid claim to Kotia in 1971. Interestingly enough, there are even villages with two sarpanchs in office each elected by the same villagers, but voting in elections separately, conducted by the two states.

On somewhat similar lines is the Karnataka-Maharashtra border dispute, arising from the disagreement over the administration of the city of Belgaum and the surrounding areas of Maharashtra.

The dispute stems from the States Reorganisation Act of 1956, which redrew state boundaries based on linguistic demographics, leading to the inclusion of the region in Karnataka. While Kannada speakers were the majority in the Marathi-speaking population also had a significant presence, leading to ongoing disagreements.

Border disputes relating to ownership of land are not confined to internal issues between the states of the country. India has yet to resolve many such disputes of that nature with neighbouring countries such as Nepal, Bangladesh, and Sri Lanka.

As is well known, following partition, a portion of the princely state of Jammu and Kashmir was occupied by Pakistan leading to the establishment of Pakistan Occupied Kashmir (POK). The region remains a source of conflict and continues to be a contentious issue between the two nations. As of June 12, no definitive resolution has been reached and it remains the bone of contention between the two nations.

Likewise, the Sino–Indian border dispute is an ongoing territorial dispute over the sovereignty of two relatively large, and several smaller, separated pieces of territory between China and India.

The India-Nepal border is yet another dispute primarily revolving around the Kalapani region, a 372 sq km area at the India-Nepal-China trijunction. Both countries claim this territory, with Nepal asserting it belongs to its Sudurpaschim province and India placing it within Uttarakhand

Similarly, the India-Bangladesh border dispute, particularly regarding fencing and border demarcation, remains a contentious issue with ongoing challenges. While India has fenced a significant portion of the border, there remain many unfenced areas on account of objections from villagers, challenging terrain, and ongoing negotiations with Bangladesh.

Belonging to the same category, is the highly vexatious issue of ownership of the Katchateevu Island, a matter of contention between Sri Lanka and India for over a century now, primarily on account of fishermen from both countries finding it a rich ground for their profession.

I have great respect for the legal profession, members of both the bar and the bench. My father started off as a lawyer and retired as a judge of the High Court of the erstwhile composite Andhra Pradesh state. Many of my friends, relatives and professional acquaintances are all distinguished legal luminaries.

All that notwithstanding, I simply could not pass up the temptation to end the article with this piece, which I came across the other day.

God and the devil were in a dispute over a broken fence.

God said you have to pay for half.

The devil said “not paying”

God said “you have to, or I’ll sue!”

The devil laughed and said “where are you gonna get a lawyer?”

(The writer was formerly Chief Secretary, Government of Andhra Pradesh)