FIELDS TO FOUNDATIONS: THE LAW BEHIND AGRICULTURAL LAND CONVERSION IN INDIA

Introduction

Agriculture has always remained the backbone of India’s economy, and most of the population depends on it for their livelihood. But the last two decades have seen a ‘land’ of change. For cities and industries to grow, agricultural land comes under constant pressure to be converted into non-agricultural uses. The process by which agricultural land is converted into land for residential, commercial, or industrial use is legally termed “agricultural land conversion”.

But how is this transformation regulated? Who decides when a farmer’s field can become a builder’s plot? And in a country where land is not just property but a legacy, how does the law balance competing claims? This piece seeks to untangle these questions, offering a deep dive into India's conversion of agricultural land and critically examining the legal and regulatory framework surrounding agricultural land conversion in India, focusing on Maharashtra, Goa, and Karnataka as representative case studies. Although land conversion promotes growth and development, it dislodges customary landowners, threatens ecosystems, and creates concerns for food security and farmer rights. Such dualism is most problematic in the law. This research blog analyses the law governing the conversion of agricultural land, detects ambiguities, and proposes operational reforms to improve the process in a manner balanced between development and justice.

Understanding the Legal Landscape

Since land is a State subject under Entry 18, List II of the Seventh Schedule, agricultural land conversion is primarily under state jurisdiction. Permissible land uses and each state's Land Revenue Codes, Urban Planning Laws, and Tenancy Acts govern the conversion process. State laws must, however, be consistent with central legislation and broad constitutional principles. According to Article 300A, no one may be deprived of their property unless legally permitted, and any conversion must be legal, adhere to due process, and serve the public interest. Furthermore, in accordance with the Directive Principles delineated in Article 39(b) and (c), resource ownership and control must promote the common good and prevent wealth concentration. State laws must be based on these principles. Therefore, when land in ecologically sensitive areas is involved, central laws such as the Environment Protection Act of 1986 and Forest Conservation laws may be applicable. Thus, although the regulatory framework is primarily state-driven, it still complies with central statutes and constitutional protections.

Three States, Three Different Roads

We now examine the individual frameworks functioning in three major states – Maharashtra, Karnataka, and Goa. All three states possess different regulatory philosophies, from formal but sluggish procedures in Maharashtra, a strict but poorly implemented system in Karnataka, and a restrictive system in Goa.

The Maharashtra Land Revenue Code, 1966, is the primary legislation governing the Maharashtra process. Section 44 of the Code provides that, except with the previous sanction of the Collector, no land should be converted to purposes other than for which the land has been reserved. A conversion tax is paid after a proposal by a person seeking to convert agricultural land is made to the Collector, along with the requisite documents. The Collector can grant sanction after verification of compliance with development control regulations and inspection for ecological constraints. Unauthorised conversion is prosecuted, but can even be regularised retrospectively if a penalty is paid. This is equal to providing a perverse incentive for non-compliance. The process is also cumbersome because local bodies like Municipal Councils and Panchayats are involved in screening applications.

The Karnataka Land Revenue Act of 1964 governs the conversion process in that state. Section 95 of this Act states that agricultural land cannot be used for any other purpose without the Deputy Commissioner's consent. An online application must be submitted, reviewed by the Revenue Department, and inspected by a Tahsildar as part of the process. A conversion order is issued and a prescribed fee is imposed after it is determined that the land does not violate any zoning laws and is not included in any acquisition plans. Karnataka has digitised land records and introduced single-window clearance systems. However, according to recent reports, 90% of the state’s land, including 50% of Bengaluru’s, has been converted illegally.

Conversely, Goa has placed a de facto ban on converting agricultural land into non-agricultural use in its Goa Amritkal Agriculture Policy, 2025. Agricultural land conversion will be permitted only in exceptional circumstances to cover essential infrastructure projects critical to the state's public. The policy was brought in due to increasing tourism, as the risk of losing all fertile lands to real estate and commercial projects had grown significantly.

When combined, these state-specific laws reveal a patchwork of regulatory frameworks. However, every state aims to achieve a balance between promoting development and safeguarding agricultural interests; the absence of uniformity frequently causes uncertainty for investors, developers, and landowners.

Where the System Falls Short

Besides the absence of uniformity in state laws, there exists several other grey areas too in these legislations that makes the entire implementation difficult and allows the authorities to take arbitrary decisions. The authorities have an overlapping jurisdiction in the entire process of agricultural land conversion. It is one of the main problems. Many states mandate multiple approvals from revenue departments, town planning offices, local bodies, and even the forest or environmental departments. This leads to lengthening of the process and loss of accountability.

Second, conversion permits are not issued according to any set criteria. Inequalities result from the authorities' subjective interpretation of terms like “public interest,” “development purpose,” and “non-agricultural use.” This makes room for discriminatory decisions and corruption. The authorities have further used this discretion to conduct unequal enforcement against illegal conversions when there are political interests or large-scale projects. Thus, even if the laws are in place, there is no check on their implementation, which has led to defeating the intent of the law. Besides this, conversions are used as loopholes to bypass land ceiling legislations. This allows illegal accumulation of land beyond prescribed ceiling limits and increases the existing disparity.

The third problematic thing is that the laws don’t provide recourse to sharecroppers and tenant farmers when owners convert land without informing or compensating them. The welfare objectives of land legislations are undermined when the rights of actual farmers are disregarded. Additionally, not much focus is given on potential environmental effects in large-scale conversions, particularly in peri-urban areas. Soil erosion, groundwater depletion, and loss of green cover are not taken into consideration before granting permits. This will endanger both food security and ecological balance in the future. Thus, even though there are state laws in place for agricultural land conversion, above problems still persist that the government must immediately address.

Fixing the Gaps: What Real Reform Looks Like

One significant improvement is the integration of land governance systems through technology. In addition to digitisation, the goal is to create a multi-platform compatible digital environment/system. There is an urgent need for real reform that addresses the underlying problems of agricultural land conversion. It entails integrating land records, zoning maps, application portals, and environmental information into a unified platform, like the Raj Nivesh portal that is accessible to all.  This method restricts the discretion of local officials, avoids duplicate entries, and drastically cuts down on processing time. This system can serve as a real-time compliance and monitoring tool if it is built with tiered verification and automatic notifications for missing documents or overlaps in land use categories. Although the outcomes of Karnataka's partial digitalisation models are encouraging, they do not fully integrate the system to overcome bureaucratic obstacles.

The second change that must be established is the establishment of a Land Use Regulatory Authority at the district level. By screening new applications and auditing conversion decisions, it ensures that zoning and environmental policies are followed, thereby making this Authority proactive rather than reactive in its approach. This is feasible if the current division of duties among several departments is eliminated. A more predictable and criteria-based decision-making process can replace capricious approvals or denials by centralising scrutiny within a technically qualified and statutorily empowered authority.

Thirdly, the reform has to prioritize protecting the rights of the non-title holders, such as sharecroppers and tenant farmers. A pre-conversion declaration of occupation status in the application process is one rational way of doing so. Enumerated cultivators who are identified or verified can be notified automatically so that they can complain, claim compensation, or settle. Therefore, social equity would be introduced to a process that has disproportionately benefited developers and landowners.  

Lastly, land conversion choices must be located within long-term city and regional planning. Far too often, approvals are issued in a vacuum without consideration of infrastructure readiness, environmental limitations, or social displacement. One possible way is to make each conversion request above a threshold acreage trigger a Local Impact Assessment, a mini-EIA, concentrating on infrastructure, water demand, traffic, and population inflow. These types of assessments do not need to be elaborate bureaucratic processes but can be checklist-based, scrutinized by the potential Land Use Authority, and integrated within the authorization process. Together, each of these changes suggests a land conversion system that is not only functional, but also equitable, as in the following decades, India will be compelled to rethink land governance as a whole part of inclusive and sustainable development, and not just as a means of enabling economic growth.