'If You Go by That Logic, Even the CM’s House May Be Reclaimed': Mehbooba Mufti’s Stark Warning Over Lease-Retrieval Drive

Mehbooba Mufti Warns Lease-Retrieval Drive Could Even Target CM’s House in Kashmir

By: Javid Amin | 10 October 2025

In Kashmir’s land politics, lease retrieval is becoming a flashpoint. Mehbooba Mufti now stakes a dramatic claim—this drive might not spare even the Chief Minister’s residence.

In a hard-hitting public address, Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) president Mehbooba Mufti lashed out at the Jammu & Kashmir government’s ongoing campaign to reclaim leased properties from longtime occupants and institutions. She warned that the current approach lacked transparency, legal clarity, and fairness, and could run the risk of even targeting the Chief Minister’s own residence if applied rigidly. Her statement was as provocative as it was symbolic.

As land and lease policies have surged to the forefront of Kashmir politics in recent months, this warning adds pressure, raises questions of rule of law, and spotlights who holds land, who claims rights, and how far the administration is willing to push its policy.

In the sections below, we explore:

What existing lease-retrieval drives and lease/land grant rules the criticism is tied to
The legal, historical, and administrative context
What Mehbooba is demanding (and proposing)
Reactions, feasibility, risks, and political stakes
Implications for land policy, public trust, and future conflict

The Lease Retrieval Drive: What It Is, and What It Targets

To fully appreciate Mehbooba’s warning, one must understand what the government is doing, what rules it relies on, and who stands to lose.

Lease-Reclamation & Expired Leases: The Drive’s Mechanics

Over the past few months, the J&K administration has intensified efforts to reclaim government land leased to individuals, businesses, religious or educational institutions, and others, citing:

Expired leases (i.e. the lease term has lapsed)
Irregularities or noncompliance in lease terms
Failure to renew existing leases under new rules or auctions
Leasehold to freehold expectations without legal basis

This means that properties long under lease—even those occupied for years—are being flagged for retrieval (eviction, takeover, or auction) if the relevant lease is deemed invalid, lapsed, or not renewed under updated norms.

Key domains being affected include:

Residential properties built on leased land
Commercial establishments (shops, hotels, guesthouses) on leased plots
Institutional or religious or educational buildings on leased land
Longstanding leaseholders who invested in structures, improvements, infrastructure

The government argues the drive is about restoring public assets, upholding rule of law, curbing revenue loss, and reclaiming land that has been misused. But critics say the move is sweeping, uneven, and potentially punitive to weaker or politically less powerful leaseholders.

Legal Instruments & Land Grant / Lease Rules 2022

One focal legal instrument in this domain is the Land Grant Rules, 2022. These rules, which govern how public lands may be granted, leased, renewed, or reclaimed, have become controversial. Reports indicate that under these rules:

Renewals of old leases are being restricted
Many leaseholders find themselves without automatic renewal rights
Some legacy hotels, guesthouses, or leaseholders are threatened with eviction or takeover notices

Mehbooba and others claim that Land Grant Rules 2022 effectively ended the facility of automatic renewal of leases. This has created widespread anxiety among those who had traditionally depended on renewing leases without auction or re-tendering. (This was part of her criticism when she alleged NC government’s negligence on land protection.

Moreover, the PDP has submitted a Jammu & Kashmir Land Rights and Regularisation Bill, 2025 (popularly termed the “Anti-Bulldozer Bill”) in the Legislative Assembly. This proposed legislation aims to:

Regularise land holdings of individuals, families, and institutions which have been in continuous possession for over 30 years
Prevent arbitrary evictions
Secure ownership rights under a statutory framework
Bring legal safeguards and predictability to leaseholders under threat of lease retrieval

It is in this context that Mehbooba’s rhetorical warning about one’s house—even the CM’s—being vulnerable should the drive go unchecked must be understood.

Precedents & Hotspots: Gulmarg, Hotels & Heritage Properties

Mehbooba and her party frequently cite Gulmarg as a flashpoint. She has claimed that nearly 60 hotels in Gulmarg, including heritage properties such as Nedous and Highlands Park, have received takeover or eviction notices from the Gulmarg Development Authority (GDA), because their leases had expired and the government is seeking to reclaim or re-auction them.

Many hotel operators invested heavily in infrastructure, renovations, branding, marketing, and reputation, counting on lease stability; the threat of eviction or auctioning of their lands is causing significant distress in tourism and investor confidence sectors.

Thus, the lease retrieval drive is not theoretical — there are concrete warnings, notices, and legal threats in many parts of J&K, especially in tourist zones or high-value land.

Mehbooba Mufti’s Warning: Substance, Strategy & Symbolism

In her public remarks, Mehbooba’s warning had a double edge: dramatizing risk and pressing for legal and political safeguards.

What Mehbooba Said & Implied

At the gathering, she made the statement:

“If they go by their own logic, even the Chief Minister’s house may not be spared.” (as reported in local media)

This is not merely provocative rhetoric. It is intended to:

Highlight arbitrariness: If the government applies its lease-retrieval logic strictly—even the top executive’s residence could legally be targeted if its lease is found expired.
Signal political risk: Even leaders are not beyond reach under that logic, which underscores how dangerous sweep of such a policy can be.
Raise stakes in public discourse: It forces people to think: if a “highest” house is vulnerable, what about ours?
Push for legal safeguards and accountability: She is demanding that land policy be anchored in law, with checks, fairness, transparency, and prevent misuse.
Paint narrative of vendetta or political targeting: She accused the administration of wielding land policy as a political tool, not as governance.

She further argued that lack of clarity and fairness in the drive could erode public trust, create fear among long-term occupants, and provoke legal challenges, displacement anxieties, and unrest.

What Mehbooba Proposes as Remedies

Her demands and proposals include:

A transparent audit of all leasehold properties, past leases, renewal histories, lease expirations, beneficiary lists
Clear guidelines and legal safeguards so that long-term or bona fide leaseholders are not arbitrarily evicted
Passage of the Land Rights and Regularisation Bill, 2025 to regularise old and continuous occupancy, provide ownership or stable lease rights, and prevent arbitrary takeovers.
Encouraging public debate and discussion on land rights in post-Article 370 J&K, and inviting stakeholder consultations rather than administratively sweeping retrievals
Urging the government to take a humane approach rather than punitive ones

By doing so, she aims to shift the narrative from eviction to regularisation, from confrontation to legal institutionalism.

Legal, Administrative & Historical Context

For Mehbooba’s warning to resonate, one must evaluate whether her scenario is legally plausible or merely rhetorical exaggeration — and how the government might defend its actions.

Lease Law in J&K: Structure & Uncertainty

In many jurisdictions, lease tenure, renewal rights, rent, conditions, and legal protections are governed by lease deeds, land grant rules, municipal and revenue laws, and court precedents. In J&K, the legal regime has become more complex in recent years, especially after changes post-2019.

Key observations:

Lease terms vary widely: Some leases might be short (5/10/20 years), others longer (50 years or more), or renewable ad infinitum if renewal clauses exist.
Renewal clauses are not always automatic: many lease agreements require application and compliance with rules or conditions. The government may argue that if someone failed to renew, the land reverts.
Compliance and noncompliance: Many leaseholders must comply with conditions (payment of lease rent, maintenance, use restrictions). Breaches may justify cancellation.
Court oversight: Courts often intervene when leaseholders file writ petitions or appeals, especially if procedural fairness was lacking or eviction is potentially unjust.
Revenue and public interest claims: Governments claim that expired leases should revert to public domain to maximize revenue, correct past anomalies, or consolidate public land.

Thus, legally, a strong government might argue it has rights to reclaim land if leases have clearly lapsed and leaseholders have no residual legal claim. But the exercise of that power must typically follow due process: notices, hearings, chance of renewal or defense, judicial review.

Historical Precedents: The Roshni Act & Land Regularisation Schemes

A crucial historical reference is the Roshni Act (J&K State Land (Vesting of Ownership to Occupants) Act, 2001). Under that Act:

Unauthorized occupants of state land could be granted ownership if they paid a determined amount, ostensibly to raise funds for power projects.
Over time, the scheme was criticized as rife with irregularities, cronyism, political favoritism, manipulation of revenue records, and unfair advantage to the wealthy or politically connected.
Eventually, the High Court struck down parts of it, and it was repealed or curtailed under later legislation.

The controversy around Roshni remains a potent memory: many ordinary people who had bought or occupied land under the scheme saw their titles challenged, land acquisition notices issued, or records in limbo. The fear of land reclamation is not abstract to many in Kashmir.

Given this legacy, whenever a renewed lease retrieval drive arises, people recall past threats of dispossession and irregular interventions. Mehbooba’s warning taps into that collective memory.

Administrative Risk: Implementation, Dispute, Backlash

Even if the government has legitimate claim in many cases, executing a large-scale lease retrieval drive is risky:

Identification and classification: Accurately identifying which leases are expired, which are disputed, and which have legal protections is complex and error-prone.
Hearing, appeals, dispute resolution: Many leaseholders will challenge notices; the process must allow for due process, appeals, tenure of suit, compensation or relief.
Infrastructure and improvement investments: Many leaseholders have built houses, shops, roads, walls, utilities — should those be demolished or compensated? That creates further cost liabilities.
Public backlash, protest, litigation: If many people feel unjustly targeted, organized protest, petitions, court cases and political opposition can erupt.
Political optics: The government must be cautious about being branded as vindictive or authoritarian. Heavy-handed eviction can backfire.

Given all this, Mehbooba’s warning—though dramatic—has a plausible basis: if the drive is applied without sensitivity or safeguards, even high-profile properties might be challenged.

Feasibility & Realism of the “CM House” Scenario

When assessing Mehbooba’s hyperbolic warning — that the Chief Minister’s house could be reclaimed — we should ask: is that legally or practically possible? Let’s parse the conditions.

What Would Make It Possible

For the CM’s official residence (or any high-profile residence) to fall under lease retrieval, several criteria must be met:

It is technically leased land, not owned land or in a different tenure (freehold, granted estate, etc.).
The lease has expired or is noncompliant, with no active renewal, no pending renewal application, or has been legally terminated.
Rules and policies do not exempt official/government properties from general lease retrieval guidelines.
No protective legal instrument or special statute immunizes that property (official residences often fall under separate statutes).
The government or judiciary applies strict logic equally, without carve-outs for high offices.

If all conditions align (lease expired, no judicial protection, no special immunity), then technically, the government could issue a retrieval notice—even for that property. Whether they would is another matter.

Why It’s Unlikely in Practice

But in real life, several obstacles make this scenario remote:

Official properties often have special status: The CM’s official residence is likely held under different classifications — government domain, not ordinary lease. Policies, rules, or custom may immunize such residences from such lease reviews.
Political risk: Reclaiming the CM’s house would be politically explosive, symbolically shocking, and likely provoke backlash. It is unlikely the government would apply its drive so literally to its own assets.
Legal, constitutional safeguards: Courts may intervene, declare a legal malaise, demand fairness, and likely prevent such a dramatic overreach.
Selective enforcement and carve-out: Governments often retain the power (informally or by policy) to carve out exceptions — especially for their own properties or key executive structures.
Administrative priority: Even if theoretically doable, implementing such a move would consume political capital and distract from actual governance.

Thus, while Mehbooba’s warning may not be a literal prediction, it is effective as a cautionary rhetorical device. It underscores how far the logic of lease retrieval can be stretched if unchecked.

Political Reactions & Alignments

Mehbooba’s warning did not fall in a vacuum; it provoked responses, alignments, and counterarguments in Kashmir’s political and civic circles.

Support from Opposition & Civil Society

Opposition parties and civil society activists have echoed her concerns: arbitrary evictions, lack of policy clarity, threat to investors and vulnerable leaseholders.
Many leaseholders, hotel operators, and individuals facing notices see the warning as validation of their fears.
The PDP’s push for the Anti-Bulldozer Bill / Land Rights & Regularisation Bill, 2025 is part of this broader alignment, positioning the party as champion of legal security and land justice.

Government / NC Reaction (or Silence)

The NC-led administration has remained mostly cautious in publicly acknowledging the scale of risk. Some sources suggest internal consultations are underway to balance enforcement with safeguards.
The ruling party and government have defended the lease retrieval drive as necessary to reclaim public assets and correct past lease irregularities.
Media reports suggest that NC is being accused by Mehbooba and others of sitting idle on the Land Grant Rules, failing to protect renewal rights, and not providing a clear policy response.

Neutral / Legal Observers

Some legal scholars caution that while governments have rights to reclaim expired leases, they must ensure due process — notices, hearings, opportunity to respond, compensation or salvage rights.
Others warn that an overly aggressive drive without legal safeguards will invite mass litigation, hinder investment confidence, and destabilize revenue expectations.
Some veteran politicians have publicly urged restraint, suggesting that governments adopt a conciliatory or phased approach, especially for long-term occupants who invested heavily.

Risks, Flash Points & Potential Fallout

Mehbooba’s warning is not just rhetorical — it signals possible flashpoints and risks. Let’s enumerate what could go wrong.

Escalation into Eviction Contests

If leaseholders resist, legal notices may turn into eviction orders. Demolitions, forcible removals, and local outrage could follow, especially in densely populated or high-profile areas.

Litigation Blowback

Mass writ petitions in High Courts or Supreme Court could stall the entire drive, force judicial guidelines, or impose restraining orders. Leaseholders may challenge procedural, substantive, or constitutional legitimacy of retrieval efforts.

Investor & Tourism Chill

In sectors like tourism (hotels, resorts, guesthouses), investor confidence may shrink if leases are unstable. Uncertainty can deter new capital, reduce maintenance spending, or push existing operators to exit.

Credibility & Public Trust Erosion

If many leaseholders perceive bias—targeting of political enemies, selective enforcement, or arbitrary action—public trust in governance and institutions may shrink. The government may be accused of vendetta rather than rule-based governance.

Political Polarization & Mobilization

Lease retrieval may become a rallying point for opposition. Dispossessed leaseholders or threatened institutions may mobilize protests, alliances, or legal campaigns. Land policy may become a central fault line in upcoming bypolls, Rajya Sabha contests, and assembly dynamics.

Administrative Overreach & Capacity Strain

The burden of reviewing vast lease datasets, verifying occupant claims, conducting hearings, and responding to appeals may overwhelm administrative machinery. Mistakes, corruption, or abuse are likely in rushed execution.

What Should Be Done: Policy Safeguards & Best Practices

To prevent the disastrous scenarios Mehbooba warns of, and to ensure that lease retrieval is viewed as legitimate and fair, the government (and any future government) must adopt principles and safeguards. Below are recommended measures.

1. Transparent Audit & Public Disclosure

Publish a complete inventory of all leased properties, their lease timelines, renewal status, occupant names, lease conditions, and pending renewals.
Disclose which properties are under dispute, which leaseholders have applied for renewal, and which are in arrears.

2. Fair Hearing & Appeal Mechanisms

Ensure every leaseholder receives formal notice with time to respond, present evidence, and be heard before any eviction order.
Create independent appeal courts or review boards (possibly judicial or quasi-judicial) to adjudicate disputes fairly.
Provide salvage rights or compensation mechanisms for improvements done by leaseholders (structures, utilities etc.).

3. Grandfathering & Grace Periods

For long-term occupants who have built and invested legally and consistently paid lease dues, offer grace periods or conversion options rather than abrupt eviction.
Phase the retrieval drive in a graduated manner — first for clearly lapsed, nonresponsive leases; later for disputed or invested ones.

4. Legal Safeguards & Regularisation Law

Pass a law like the Land Rights & Regularisation Bill, 2025 (Anti-Bulldozer Bill) that protects continuous possession above a threshold (e.g. 30 years) and regularizes legitimate leaseholders.
Include clauses exempting vulnerable leaseholders (residential, small scale, institutional) from harsh takeovers.
Provide path to conversion, compensation, or lawful allotment rather than blanket evictions.

5. Carve-outs for Sensitive / Government Properties

Exclude government-owned official residences, heritage, public infrastructures, or strategic properties from sweeping retrieval logic unless clear lease default is found (which is unlikely). The government should not appear to be taking away its own property under its own policy.

6. Stakeholder Consultation & Policy Dialogue

Involve leaseholders, hotel associations, community groups, legal experts, revenue officers, and civil society in drafting and implementing the retrieval policy.
Publish draft rules, allow objections, and revise. Avoid surprise mass notices without prior stakeholder communication.

7. Monitoring & Accountability

Establish oversight (ombudsman, audit, legislative committee) over the retrieval process to prevent abuse, favoritism, or political targeting.
Periodic reporting to legislature/assembly on progress, disputes, and redressal.
Ensure administrative officers operating retrievals are held accountable for improper or arbitrary actions.

Political Stakes: Why This Matters Beyond Land

Land policy in Kashmir, as elsewhere, is not merely administrative—it is deeply political. Mehbooba’s warning brings to light several stakes.

Narrative & Legitimacy

If lease retrieval is seen as fair and rule-based, it can strengthen the government’s legitimacy, restore public faith in institutions.
If seen as draconian, vindictive, or politically selective, it will fuel narrative of state overreach and disenfranchisement.

Electoral Ramifications

In upcoming bypolls (Budgam, Anantnag etc.), leaseholders or threatened property owners may swing votes, join protests, or break from parties they see as unsympathetic.
Opposition parties may use the lease drive as a campaign lever, promising protection, regularization, or legal redress.

Institutional Trust

The pace, fairness, and accountability of the lease retrieval will signal how the government values due process, transparency, and rule of law. A botched drive can deepen alienation.
Leaseholders will assess whether the government respects long-standing rights or simply wields coercion.

Conflict & Stability Risk

In land-rich, densely inhabited Kashmir, evictions or disputes over leases can turn volatile—leading to protests, legal confrontation, or social unrest.
The government may have to manage backlash in sensitive regions, tribal belts, religious or institutional lands.

Policy Precedent

How the government handles this drive will set precedent on land policy, lease renewal, regularisation, and property rights in J&K for years. It will shape investor climate, tourism policy, local confidence.

Assessing the Warning: Is Mehbooba’s Claim Overblown—or Alarming?

Mehbooba’s claim (that even the CM’s house may be vulnerable under strict logic) may be rhetorically exaggerated, but the broader caution is real. The warning functions as both protective rhetoric and political pressure. Here’s how one should interpret it:

As symbolic lever: It dramatizes how extreme application of lease rules can reach even the highest offices if unchecked — thereby compelling restraint.
As protective shield: If the government is forced to retreat, the warning gives ground for alliance arguments or negotiated carve-outs.
As test of sincerity: Whether the warning is carried out (i.e. whether the government ensures CM’s residence is immune) will test whether the government is serious about rule of law or is wielding rhetoric.
As rallying cry: It galvanizes leaseholders, politicians, hotel owners, and civil society to mobilize before notices become evictions.

In short, while the literal possibility of CM’s house being reclaimed is low, the broader logic and caution it signals are worth taking seriously.