A Private Member’s Bill seeking divisional status for the mountainous Pir Panjal and Chenab Valley regions of Jammu and creation of new 16 districts in Jammu and Kashmir (J&K) is likely to be tabled in the J&K Assembly on Tuesday after a nod from Lt Governor (L-G) Manoj Sinha. Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) legislator Waheed Para, who submitted the Bill, said that the idea is to “decentralise the administration especially in the remote and hilly areas” of J&K.What does the Bill seek, what is the politics behind it, and what are its financial implications? We explain.The Bill seeks the creation of two new administrative divisions of Jammu division’s Pir Panjal and Chenab Valley regions. The Pir Panjal region comprises the twin border districts of Rajouri and Poonch while the three mountainous districts of Kishtwar, Doda and Ramban form the Chenab Valley region. The Bill says that the proposed Pir Panjal and Chenab Valley divisions should be headquartered in Rajouri and Doda respectively.In addition to the divisional status, the Bill seeks creation of 16 new districts in J&K: eight each in Kashmir and Jammu divisions. Currently, J&K has two divisions — Kashmir and Jammu — and 20 districts, 10 each in both divisions.Also read | Why L-G nod to a private member Bill in J&K puts National Conference in a bindThe Bill says that “large geographical area, mountainous terrain and regional imbalance have adversely affected administrative efficiency and public service delivery” in J&K and the creation of new administrative units will “ensure decentralised governance, equitable development and accessible administration”.Not a new demandThe demand for divisional status for these two regions is not new. The region’s political and social leaders have long been campaigning for a Hill Development Council or Divisional status. They have accused mainland Jammu — comprising Udhampur, Jammu, Samba, Kathua, and Reasi — of discrimination, saying that the majority of development funds are spent in the districts bordering the Jammu district.Over many decades, many Bills and resolutions were tabled in the erstwhile J&K state Assembly seeking regional autonomy for the two regions. In February 2019, when Ladakh was granted divisional status — before it was carved out as a separate Union Territory after the abrogation of J&K’s special status that August — the PDP had reiterated its demand for separate divisions for Pir Panjal and Chenab Valley. Reacting to Ladakh’s divisional status, the National Conference (NC) had then even promised divisional status to the two regions if it were to come to power. Story continues below this ad“After the elections of 2019, should the people of J&K repose faith in the NC, our government will grant division status to Chenab Valley and Pir Panchal regions as already laid out in our regional autonomy promise,” Omar Abdullah, NC leader (and now J&K Chief Minister) had posted on X on February 8, 2019. “We will take care of regional and sub-regional aspirations. We won’t adopt the pick-and-choose approach of the Governor but will instead take a holistic view and address the wider problems. Our regional autonomy document will be our template.”But the elections did not happen and J&K was downgraded into two UTs.Also read | The train to Kashmir: How it can be a gamechanger for tourism and economy of J&KThe renewed demand for divisional status came in January this year, after BJP leader Sham Lal Sharma demanded a separate state for Jammu. During a public meeting in Rajouri, former CM and PDP president Mehbooba Mufti demanded divisional status for the two regions. “Pir Panjal and Chenab Valley face serious administrative neglect. Their topography, vulnerability to environmental hazards, and distance from decision-making centres make divisional status the need of the hour,” Mufti said. She added that her demand was “not political rhetoric” but an “administrative necessity” and that governance must reach people at their doorsteps, especially in border and mountainous areas.Story continues below this adBoth the ruling NC and the major opposition party BJP have called Mufti’s demand as advocacy for a “Greater Kashmir”. This refers to the idea that Pir Panjal and Chenab Valley should be united with Kashmir, owing to their cultural, social, and political affinity to Kashmir more than Jammu.BJP has earlier accused Mufti of speaking Pakistan’s language, especially as her demand goes against BJP’s demand for a separate Jammu state. “Mehbooba Mufti is not speaking for the people of Pir Panjal or Chenab Valley. She is repeating the language of Pakistan and its Inter-Service Intelligence (ISI), which has always dreamt of creating a so-called ‘Greater Kashmir’ by gradually absorbing Jammu’s Muslim-majority belts into Kashmir,” BJP spokesperson Altaf Thakur said. “This is a dangerous experiment on India’s sovereignty.” Farooq Abdullah and Mehbooba Mufti in Srinagar in August 2022. NC president Farooq Abdullah termed Mufti’s demand for separate divisions for Pir Panjal and Chenab Valley as “divisive”, comparing it with the “Dixon plan”. Photo: Shuaib MasoodiNC president Farooq Abdullah also termed Mufti’s demand as “divisive”, comparing it with the “Dixon plan”. “It is the Dixon Plan. It was an old plan to divide J&K along the Chenab River, making it ‘Greater Kashmir’,” he said.Sir Owen Dixon, an Australian judge who visited the subcontinent after the 1950 United Nations resolution on the Kashmir conflict, had proposed that Ladakh be permanently given to India while the northern areas and Pakistan-occupied Kashmir be given to Pakistan. Termed the “Dixon plan”, he advocated for the Jammu region to be split between India and Pakistan along the Chenab River, and the people of the Kashmir Valley be given a choice to decide their own fate through a plebiscite.The politics behind the moveStory continues below this adThrough this Bill, PDP has put both NC and BJP in a tight spot. For NC and BJP MLAs from the two regions, opposing the Bill is difficult as it would go against popular sentiments there. Out of the 15 Assembly seats in Chenab and Pir Panjal, NC won six and BJP four. Two independent candidates from the two regions are also supporting the NC-led government. Similarly, it would be tough for the MLAs to oppose the creation of new districts in their constituencies.This has already resulted in some “course correction”: while NC has preferred silence since Farooq Abdullah’s “Dixon” remark, BJP leader Sham Lal Sharma said they are not averse to divisional status for the two regions and creation of new administrative units. Sharma said they object to the nomenclature of “Pir Panjal” and “Chenab valley” being used to “play to the political gallery”.Also read | As terrorists shift base to mountains and dense forests, a weekly security review to bring Jammu and Kashmir closer“The Bill should come… Our party’s demand is also that (new) administrative units should come up, seven (new) districts are badly required in Jammu,” Sharma said. “As far as the divisions are concerned, we say that the erstwhile district of Doda should become a division. Similarly, Udhampur should also be made a division. The smaller the units, the more efficient is monitoring. Poonch and Rajouri are also remote, the government should make it a division, we will support it.”Process of approval, and financial implicationsUnder the Jammu and Kashmir Reorganisation Act, certain Bills, specifically finance Bills or those that may impact J&K’s financial obligations, require approval from the L-G before being introduced in the Assembly. Story continues below this adSection 36(b) of the Reorganisation Act says that a “Bill or Amendment shall not be introduced into or move in the Legislative Assembly except on the recommendation of the Lt Governor, if such Bill or Amendment makes provisions for… the amendment of the law with respect to any financial obligation undertaken or to be undertaken by the Government of Union territory”.Creation of new divisions and administrative units is likely to have financial implications in terms of infrastructure development and creation of posts for the new divisional office and administrative units. While most of the existing staff of a particular district could be divided between the existing and new administrative units, it would need an infrastructural push to create new divisional and district headquarters. Para, however, said that the Bill “doesn’t involve the appropriation of any money out of the Consolidated Fund of the Union Territory of Jammu and Kashmir”.The Bill reads: “The creation of new administrative divisions, districts, sub- divisions and Tehsils under the Bill is enabling in nature and shall be operationalised only through notifications issued by the Government from time to time. Any expenditure arising out of such notifications including expenditure on infrastructure, personnel or administrative arrangements shall be met from the existing budgetary provision or through future budgetary allocations as approved by the legislative assembly in the normal course. Accordingly the Bill shall not entail any immediate or direct financial liability.”Para told The Indian Express that the Bill will have minimal financial implications. “If there were huge financial implications of this Bill, the L-G wouldn’t have approved it,” he said.