JAMMU: A private member’s bill by People’s Democratic Party (PDP) MLA Waheed Para, seeking 16 new districts and two divisions in Jammu and Kashmir has stirred a hornets’ nest with the ruling National Conference (NC) and the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), slamming it as a “sabotage bill” and accusing para of “toeing the line of Pak’s ISI demand for Greater Kashmir”. PDP MLA’s bill seeks 16 new districts in J&K
Lieutenant governor Manoj Sinha recommended the introduction and consideration of Para’s bill called, “The Jammu and Kashmir Territorial Administrative Reorganization Bill, 2026”, that seeks a statutory framework for reorganisation of administrative divisions, districts, sub-divisions and tehsils across J&K.
According to an official order, issued in pursuance of sub-section (1) of Section 36 of the Jammu and Kashmir Reorganisation Act, 2019, Sinha accorded approval for introduction of the bill in the assembly.
The proposed legislation calls for the creation of new administrative divisions, including a Chenab Division with headquarters in Doda and a Pir Panjal Division with headquarters in Rajouri, in addition to the already two existing divisions (Jammu and Kashmir) and eight new districts each in the two regions of Jammu and Kashmir. Currently, the two regions have 10 districts each.
Para said, “There is a need to reorganize administrative units in Jammu and Kashmir after delimitation of constituencies and bifurcation of the state. There are disputes on several issues, like Article 370 and statehood but the people should get relief and issues which are in our control should be worked upon to mitigate socio economic condition of the people”.
“If two divisions are created in Doda and Rajouri then the people will get some relaxation. Similarly, we feel that Bhaderwah, Akhnoor, Nowshera should also get district statusas they are important and sensitive areas. We have seen how people suffered during Operation Sindoor. Tangdhar is another area on border, which should be made a district. The idea is that there should be decentralization of power and the governance reaches at the doorsteps of the people,” he added.
Para regretted that the incumbent government headed by chief minister Omar Abdullah was not interested in resolving real issues confronting the people.
The bill also proposes the creation of several new districts in the Kashmir division, including the Tral-Awantipora hill district, Ashmuqam-Pahalgam hill district, Beerwah, Sopore, Handwara, Gurez, Karnah hill district and the Norabad hill district.
In the Jammu division, the bill suggests the formation of new hill districts such as Nowshera, Bhaderwah, Banihal, Thathri, Akhnoor, Billawar, Kotranka and Mendhar for focused administrative planning.
According to the draft, the government will have the power to assign districts to Jammu, Kashmir, Chenab or Pir Panjal divisions through notifications, while ensuring geographical continuity, administrative convenience, socio-cultural cohesion and balanced regional development.
However, NC has called it a “sabotage bill”.
Party spokesperson Imran Nabi Dar said, “The real intent behind the bill is missing. It is the same PDP that rejected recommendations by a panel headed by then chief secretary Khurshied Ganai on new administrative units. At that time the PDP-BJP government was in place.
“Through this bill, PDP wants to sabotage the initiatives taken by the NC government to empower sub-regions. It is a pre-planned strategy. It is something which is practically not possible,” said Dar.
BJP spokesperson Altaf Thakur said the proposed bill smacks of sinister agenda.
“It is nothing but toeing the line of Pakistan’s ISI, which want to create ‘greater Kashmir’. The bill proposes two divisions in Doda for Chenab Valley and in Rajouri for Pir Panjal. In 1990s Pak’s ISI strived hard to merge these Muslim majority areas of Jammu with Kashmir and create Greater Kashmir,” said Thakur.
Why the PDP has not proposed creating two more divisions in Kashmir for north, south and central Kashmir? he asked.
Assembly speaker Abdul Rahim Rather said, “LG accepting a private member’s bill is routine. However, at the stage of introducing a private member’s bill, debate is not allowed. Only the member, who moved the bill, can be allowed to explain it. Usually, the government asks the members to not to press such bills and leave them to the government. However if the member presses for it, the chair then takes the course of voice vote. In this case, the government’s stand will be known only when the bill comes up in the house.”
The proposal has been submitted to the assembly secretariat for consideration during the ongoing Budget session, which will resume on Friday after a five-week hiatus. The first leg of the session was held from February 2 to 20.
The session is scheduled to conclude on April 4.