“The J&K Assembly debate on regularizing private schools on public land highlights a critical conflict between profit-driven operations and the need for public accountability, transparency, and responsible stewardship of communal resources.”
Shafqat Bukhari
The recent debate in the Jammu and Kashmir Assembly over the regularisation of land occupied by private educational institutions has sparked a necessary conversation about accountability, transparency, and the social role of education. National Conference MLA Farooq Ahmed Shah argued in favor of recognising land held by private schools, questioning opposition to the move when similar land is provided to outsiders. BJP legislators, however, warned that such regularisation could become a “Pandora’s box,” pointing to the controversial history of the Roshni Act. Beneath this legislative tussle lies a deeper question: should private institutions, driven by profit motives, be allowed to operate on public land without proper oversight? Private schools often tout modern facilities, advanced curricula, and superior teaching standards. Yet, their existence frequently reflects a broader system of inequality and privilege. Many institutions occupy public land for decades without clear legal entitlement, raising concerns about legality, fairness, and misuse. The very need for regularisation exposes a long-standing loophole: private schools have functioned in a grey area, with minimal accountability to government authorities or the public. This lack of oversight is particularly concerning in a region where access to quality education remains limited for the majority of students. The argument that land is being provided to outsiders anyway does little to address the ethical and social implications of legitimising these irregular holdings. Education is a public good and a constitutional right, not a commodity. By retroactively granting legal status to private schools occupying public land, authorities risk prioritising the interests of institutions over the needs of students and the community. History provides cautionary examples; past irregularities in land allocation, such as the Roshni Act controversy, show how legal loopholes can be exploited, often at the cost of public trust. Moreover, private schools contribute to widening educational inequality in the Union Territory.
“Land regularisation for private schools in Jammu and Kashmir must be balanced with robust public accountability. Policymakers should prioritize equity, transparency, and the constitutional right to education over the interests of private institutions to ensure that these schools serve the broader community rather than operating with unchecked privilege.”
While affluent urban families benefit from these well-resourced institutions, rural and economically weaker students continue to struggle with underfunded government schools. Regularising private land holdings without robust accountability mechanisms further entrenches this divide, creating a two-tier system where quality education becomes the privilege of the few. To prevent this, any move towards regularisation must be accompanied by stringent conditions. Schools must comply with transparent fee structures, infrastructure norms, teacher qualifications, and curriculum standards. Land regularisation should not become a blank cheque for institutions to operate without oversight; it must ensure that public resources are used in a manner that serves the broader educational interests of society. In conclusion, while private schools play a role in Jammu and Kashmir’s educational landscape, policymakers must carefully balance private initiative with public accountability. Legal recognition of their land must not come at the expense of equity, transparency, and the constitutional right to education. Only through careful regulation and oversight can private schools contribute meaningfully to society, rather than becoming symbols of privilege and unchecked power. Education should empower communities—not just enrich institutions.
