The Siruthavur Land Dispute: A Fight for Justice

A 58-Year Fight for Land and Dignity

The story of Siruthavur is a decades-long struggle of Dalit families to reclaim what is rightfully theirs, a battle against political power, systemic bias, and bureaucratic apathy.

Acres Allotted to Dalit Families

Years of Inaction After Verdict

People Mobilized for Justice

The Long Road to Justice

From a hopeful beginning to a protracted legal battle and a powerful people's movement, this timeline chronicles the key moments in the Siruthavur land dispute. Click on each event to learn more.

Understanding the Conflict

The Siruthavur dispute is more than a legal case; it's a reflection of deep-seated issues of power, caste, and governance in India. This section explores the core facets of the struggle.

Land, Power & Politics

The case reveals how political influence was allegedly used to illegally acquire 53 acres meant for landless families and an additional 34 acres of government land, tying into a larger pattern of disproportionate assets.

Systemic Class & Caste Bias

For 15 years, successive governments failed to implement court and commission findings. This inaction exposes a profound bias in a system that repeatedly fails to protect the land rights of Dalit communities.

The People's Movement

When the state failed, the people rose. The All India Kisan Sabha (AIKS) organized a massive, peaceful protest, demonstrating the crucial role of grassroots mobilization in forcing accountability and demanding justice.

Justice Delayed is Justice Denied

The findings of the Justice Sivasubramaniam Commission were clear, and the Supreme Court's verdict on related cases provided a strong legal basis for action. Yet, for 15 years, these decisions gathered dust, leaving the Dalit families in a state of perpetual waiting.

The Commission's Verdict (2010)

All 53 acres were fraudulently registered and must be cancelled.
An additional 34 acres of government land were illegally occupied.
The original land sales were void; government has power to reclaim the land.
Identified relatives of V.K. Sasikala as guilty of manipulating records.

The Reality on the Ground

For 15 years, no land was restored to the rightful owners.
Successive governments failed to implement the legal decisions.
The delay perpetuated the injustice and denied the families their constitutional rights and dignity.
Action was only promised after massive public protest.

The Resurgence of the Red Flag

On July 31, 2025, the All India Kisan Sabha (AIKS) led a massive, peaceful land retrieval movement. Hundreds of cadres and beneficiaries, carrying the symbolic red flag, gathered to demand action. Led by figures like Com P. Shanmugam, the protest was a powerful display of collective will.

The warning was clear: if the state machinery continued to fail, the people would seize the land under the banner of the red flag. This determined stance, rooted in a long history of peasant movements, successfully forced the authorities to respond immediately.

Total Land in Dispute (in Acres)

The Path Forward

The Siruthavur struggle highlights the need for systemic change. While the immediate promise of a survey is a victory, long-term solutions are required to prevent such injustices from recurring and to ensure land rights for all marginalized communities.

Expedite Land Restoration

Establish fast-track mechanisms with clear timelines to restore lands to Dalit and other vulnerable groups based on court orders.

Ensure Official Accountability

Implement anti-bias training for officials and hold them accountable for failing to implement legal directives, especially in cases involving marginalized groups.

Digitize Land Records

Create a transparent, publicly accessible digital land record system to prevent fraudulent transactions and protect assigned lands.

Strengthen Legal Protections

Rigorously enforce the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act and provide robust legal aid and awareness campaigns for Dalit communities.

Empower Communities

Promote the participation of marginalized communities in local governance and land management to ensure their rights are protected.

Support Civil Society

Recognize and protect the vital role of civil society organizations and media in highlighting injustice and holding the state accountable.

Executive Summary

The Siruthavur land dispute in Tamil Nadu represents a profound and protracted struggle for justice, centering on 53 acres of agricultural land originally allotted to 20 landless Dalit families in 1967 by the then DMK Chief Minister C.N. Annadurai. This progressive land reform measure was systematically undermined over decades by the alleged fraudulent occupation and illegal registration of these lands by former Chief Minister J. Jayalalithaa and her aide V.K. Sasikala, who reportedly leveraged their political influence. The subsequent legal battles led to the formation of the Justice Sivasubramaniam Commission, whose findings confirmed the fraudulent registrations and the illegal occupation of an additional 34 acres of adjacent government land, including Jayalalithaa’s private bungalow.

Crucially, despite these clear legal verdicts and the Supreme Court's broader rulings on related disproportionate assets cases, the restoration of the Siruthavur land to its rightful Dalit owners has been delayed for 15 years. This prolonged inaction by successive governments underscores a persistent class and caste bias embedded within the governance and law enforcement systems. The recent large-scale land retrieval movement on July 31, 2025, spearheaded by the All India Kisan Sabha (AIKS) under the leadership of Com P. Shanmugam, proved to be a pivotal moment. This mobilization successfully compelled immediate assurances from revenue officials to survey the land and initiate the cancellation of fraudulent registrations. The Siruthavur case stands as a stark illustration of systemic injustice and highlights the critical role of organized grassroots movements in the enduring fight for dignity, land rights, and equality for marginalized communities.

I. Introduction: The Siruthavur Land Dispute – A Symbol of Enduring Injustice

The Siruthavur land dispute, situated in Tamil Nadu's Chengalpattu District, serves as a compelling case study in India's persistent challenges concerning land reform, social justice, and the effective enforcement of legal mandates. This narrative unfolds as a complex interplay of historical promises, alleged political abuse of power, and protracted bureaucratic inertia. At its core, the dispute revolves around 53 acres of agricultural land initially earmarked and distributed in 1967 to 19 landless Dalit families and one Muslim family. This act, initiated by the then DMK Chief Minister C.N. Annadurai, was a significant step towards economic empowerment for some of the most vulnerable sections of society [User Query].

However, this progressive measure was reportedly subverted over the ensuing decades. The lands, intended to provide economic independence, were allegedly illegally registered and occupied by powerful political figures, specifically former Chief Minister J. Jayalalithaa and her close aide V.K. Sasikala, who are said to have exploited their political influence [User Query]. This alleged land grab initiated a prolonged and arduous struggle for restitution, encompassing both legal challenges and social mobilization.

The recent large-scale land retrieval movement on July 31, 2025, orchestrated by the All India Kisan Sabha (AIKS) under the leadership of Com P. Shanmugam, marks a significant escalation in this long-standing conflict. This mobilization, which saw hundreds of cadres carrying red flags, vividly illustrates the deep frustration arising from the 15-year delay in implementing judicial verdicts that had affirmed the rights of the original beneficiaries [User Query]. The event underscores the indispensable role of grassroots movements in exerting pressure on state machinery to address long-pending justice issues, particularly those affecting marginalized communities.

II. Historical Roots of Dispossession: The Siruthavur Land Allotment and its Subversion

The Original Allotment (1967)

In 1967, the government led by then DMK Chief Minister C.N. Annadurai undertook a significant land reform initiative in Siruthavur village. As part of this effort, 53 acres of agricultural land were distributed to 19 landless Dalit families and one Muslim family [User Query]. This measure was designed to uplift the "depressed classes" by providing them with a fundamental asset—land—thereby fostering economic independence and social mobility.¹ Such allotments were crucial for communities historically denied land ownership and subjected to systemic discrimination.

Alleged Fraudulent Acquisition by J. Jayalalithaa and V.K. Sasikala

Despite the original intent, the justice embodied in the 1967 land distribution was allegedly overturned in subsequent decades. The lands were reportedly fraudulently occupied and illegally registered in the names of J. Jayalalithaa and her aide V.K. Sasikala, who are accused of exploiting their political power to facilitate these transfers [User Query]. Reports indicate that this acquisition was linked to a private resort associated with Jayalalithaa, with ownership transfers occurring under the guise of welfare schemes.¹

This specific incident in Siruthavur is consistent with a larger pattern of asset accumulation attributed to Jayalalithaa and Sasikala, extensively documented in the Disproportionate Assets (DA) case. The DA case involved allegations of acquiring properties valued at over ₹66.65 crore during Jayalalithaa's first tenure as Chief Minister (1991–96), often through proxy accounts and shell companies.² The prosecution in the DA case contended that Jayalalithaa amassed assets not only in her own name but also in the names of co-accused Sasikala, her sister-in-law J. Ilavarasi, and nephew V.N. Sudhakaran.³ The Supreme Court, in its judgment on the DA case, observed that numerous private firms were established, many of which conducted no business activities other than purchasing property, as part of a concerted conspiracy.⁴ Evidence also indicates that thousands of acres of land were allegedly seized by Sasikala and Sudhakaran through 32 companies they floated, often acquired for negligible sums during this period.⁵ The Siruthavur land, encompassing both the original 53 acres and an additional 34 acres of adjacent government land (which included Jayalalithaa’s private bungalow), was part of this alleged illegal occupation.¹

The Siruthavur land grab, therefore, is not an isolated incident but rather a manifestation of a broader, systemic pattern of illegal asset accumulation and land appropriation by powerful political figures. This connection to the Disproportionate Assets case reveals a consistent modus operandi, where political influence was allegedly leveraged to acquire vast tracts of land through illicit means, often at the expense of marginalized communities.

III. The Pursuit of Justice: Commissions, Courts, and Convictions

Formation and Findings of the Justice Sivasubramaniam Commission

The long-standing allegations of land grabbing in Siruthavur prompted significant efforts by the Communist Party of India (Marxist) [CPI(M)]. Following a petition filed by the late CPI(M) state secretary N Varadarajan in July 2006, the DMK government responded by constituting the Justice K.P. Sivasubramanian Commission of Inquiry on July 27, 2006.⁶ The Commission's mandate was to investigate the allegations of fraudulent land grabbing from Adi Dravidars and other landless poor in Siruthavur village.⁶

After an extensive inquiry, which included taking statements from 40 witnesses, the Commission submitted its 813-page report in two volumes to Chief Minister M. Karunanidhi on February 28, 2010.⁶ The report's findings were significant:

It confirmed that all 53 acres originally allotted to Dalit families were fraudulently registered, and explicitly recommended that these registrations must be cancelled.¹
The Commission also found that an additional 34 acres of adjacent government land, including the site of Jayalalithaa’s private bungalow, had been illegally occupied.¹
While the Commission found no direct evidence to suggest former Chief Minister Jayalalithaa's involvement in the Siruthavur land grabbing, noting that no specific complaint was filed against her and no notice issued, it did hold V.N. Sudhakaran and J. Ilavarasi (relatives of Sasikala) "guilty of manipulating the records" and identified them as "beneficiaries of an illegal transfer of patta on a single day without any inquiry".⁹
Crucially, the Commission concluded that although the original assignees had sold the land, the "alienation was void," thereby affirming the government's power to "resume the land".⁹

The Supreme Court's Role and Broader Implications from the Disproportionate Assets Case

The User Query states that the conclusions of the Sivasubramaniam Commission were "later upheld by the Supreme Court of India." While the Supreme Court did not directly review and explicitly uphold the specific findings and recommendations of the Justice Sivasubramaniam Commission report on Siruthavur, its verdict in the broader Disproportionate Assets (DA) case against Jayalalithaa and Sasikala had significant implications for the Siruthavur land. The Supreme Court's judgments in the DA case established a pattern of illegal asset acquisition and included orders for the confiscation of properties linked to the accused's proxy companies, some of which were located in Kanchipuram district where Siruthavur is situated.² This provided an overarching legal foundation for action on such illegally acquired properties. The Hindu newspaper reported that action on the Sivasubramaniam Commission's findings was "suspended till the final disposal of cases before the Supreme Court," indicating that the DA case judgment was indeed awaited for its bearing on the Siruthavur matter.⁹

The Supreme Court's verdict in the Disproportionate Assets case, delivered on February 14, 2017, overturned the Karnataka High Court's acquittal. This ruling convicted Sasikala, Ilavarasi, and V.N. Sudhakaran, sentencing them to four years' imprisonment and imposing substantial fines. The case against Jayalalithaa was abated due to her demise, but fines were levied on her properties.² Following this verdict, the Tamil Nadu government initiated the process of confiscating 68 properties linked to the accused, including those registered under companies they floated, some of which were located in Kanchipuram district.⁴ This broader legal context, which firmly established the illegality of the accused's asset accumulation, lent considerable weight to the claims regarding the fraudulent acquisition of the Siruthavur land.

The following tables provide a chronological overview of key events and a summary of the Commission's findings and their legal implications:

Table 1: Timeline of Key Legal and Political Events in the Siruthavur Land Dispute

Date/Period	Event	Associated Information
1967	Land allotment to 19 Dalit and 1 Muslim family in Siruthavur by CM C.N. Annadurai.	53 acres of agricultural land distributed. ¹
1991-1996	Period of alleged fraudulent occupation and registration of land by J. Jayalalithaa and V.K. Sasikala.	Linked to broader Disproportionate Assets case and use of proxy companies for land acquisition. ²
July 27, 2006	Justice Sivasubramaniam Commission of Inquiry constituted by DMK government.	Formed following a petition by CPI(M) state secretary N Varadarajan to probe land grabbing allegations. ⁶
February 28, 2010	Justice Sivasubramaniam Commission report submitted to CM M. Karunanidhi.	813-page report based on 40 witness statements, confirming fraudulent registrations. ⁶
September 27, 2014	Special Court convicts Jayalalithaa, Sasikala, Ilavarasi, and Sudhakaran in Disproportionate Assets case.	Sentenced to four years imprisonment and fines; Jayalalithaa disqualified as CM. ²
February 14, 2017	Supreme Court of India upholds conviction of Sasikala, Ilavarasi, and Sudhakaran in DA case.	Case against Jayalalithaa abated due to her death; fines levied on her properties. ²
May 30, 2017	Tamil Nadu government begins confiscating properties belonging to Jayalalithaa and Sasikala in DA case.	Instructions issued to collectors in six districts, including Kanchipuram, to take possession of 68 properties. ⁴
July 31, 2025	All India Kisan Sabha (AIKS) leads massive land retrieval movement in Siruthavur.	Hundreds of cadres and beneficiaries demand return of land, led by Com P. Shanmugam. [User Query]
August 1, 2025 (onwards)	Revenue officials assure protest leaders of land survey and cancellation of fraudulent registrations within a week.	Immediate response to the AIKS mobilization. [User Query]

Table 2: Summary of Justice Sivasubramaniam Commission Findings and Supreme Court Affirmation/Implication

Commission Finding	Details	Supreme Court's Relevant Action/Implication
1. Fraudulent Registration of Allotted Land	All 53 acres originally allotted to Dalit families were found to be fraudulently registered. The Commission recommended cancellation of these registrations.	The Supreme Court's conviction of Sasikala, Sudhakaran, and Ilavarasi in the Disproportionate Assets case, and its order for the confiscation of properties linked to their illegal wealth (including those in Kanchipuram district registered under proxy companies), provides the overarching legal mandate for the government to act on the Siruthavur land. ²
2. Illegal Occupation of Adjacent Government Land	An additional 34 acres of adjacent government land, including the site of Jayalalithaa's private bungalow, was found to be illegally occupied.	(As above) The DA case verdict established the pattern of illegal acquisition of properties by the accused, which would encompass such government lands.
3. Void Alienation of Assigned Land	The Commission concluded that while the assignees may have sold the land, the "alienation was void," affirming the government's power to "resume the land."	(As above) The SC's ruling on confiscation of illegally acquired assets reinforces the government's authority to reclaim such properties. ⁹
4. Guilt of Sasikala's Relatives	V.N. Sudhakaran and J. Ilavarasi (relatives of Sasikala) were held "guilty of manipulating the records" and identified as "beneficiaries of an illegal transfer of patta on a single day without any inquiry."	The Supreme Court explicitly convicted Sasikala, Sudhakaran, and Ilavarasi in the DA case, validating the findings of illicit financial and property dealings. ²

IV. Apathy and Bias: The Failure of State Implementation

Fifteen Years of Inaction Post-Verdict

Despite the clear and unequivocal findings of the Justice Sivasubramaniam Commission in 2010, which confirmed fraudulent registrations and illegal occupation of land, and the subsequent Supreme Court verdict in the Disproportionate Assets case in 2017 that led to confiscation orders for illegally acquired properties, not a single acre of the Siruthavur land has been restored to the rightful Dalit owners for 15 years [User Query]. This prolonged delay highlights a significant failure in governance. Successive governments, irrespective of their political affiliation, have demonstrably failed to implement these legal decisions [User Query]. For instance, even the DMK government, which initially constituted the Commission, did not take "hasty action" based on its recommendations, as explicitly stated by then Chief Minister M. Karunanidhi.⁸ Furthermore, action on the Commission's findings was explicitly "suspended till the final disposal of cases before the Supreme Court".⁹ Yet, even after the Supreme Court delivered its verdict in the DA case in 2017, the Siruthavur land remained unrestored for years, indicating a persistent lack of political will or administrative follow-through.

Deep-rooted Class and Caste Bias

This protracted inaction exposes a deep-seated class and caste bias embedded within the state's governance and law enforcement machinery [User Query]. The Siruthavur case serves as a stark illustration of how legal provisions and judicial pronouncements, intended to deliver justice, can be systematically undermined by entrenched prejudice and administrative apathy, particularly when the rights of marginalized communities are at stake.

The Siruthavur case is a localized example of a pervasive, systemic issue of Dalit land dispossession and the state's broader failure to uphold land reforms and protect vulnerable communities across Tamil Nadu and India. Historical data reveals a distressing pattern: while approximately 320,000 "Panchami" or "Depressed Class" (D.C.) land plots were distributed to Dalits in Tamil Nadu since 1892, a significant portion of these lands has been seized and illegally transferred to caste Hindus, with only about 3,000 acres reportedly remaining in Dalit hands today.¹¹ Research further indicates a concerning increase in land grabbing from Dalits, employing various tactics such as offering unfairly low prices, coercing exchanges for other properties or debt relief, and forcing sales through encroachment.¹¹

Despite the legal abolition of the caste system and the existence of constitutional provisions for affirmative action and protection, including the Prevention of Atrocities Act enacted in 1995 ¹², caste-based discrimination and violence against Dalits persist. Reports indicate instances where police fail to offer adequate protection or even attempt to suppress evidence in cases involving atrocities against Dalits.¹³ The Siruthavur case, where land allotted in 1967 remained unrestored by 2025 despite clear legal directives, perfectly exemplifies this historical and ongoing pattern of injustice and the state's failure to enforce land rights for Dalits. As Comrade P. Shanmugam articulated during the recent mobilization, "This is not just a legal issue; it is a moral and constitutional one. The land belongs to the Dalit families. Denying it to them is denying their dignity and their rights as citizens" [User Query]. This statement underscores that the challenge extends beyond mere legal technicalities to fundamental issues of human dignity and constitutional rights.

V. The Resurgence of the Red Flag: AIKS's Mobilization for Land and Dignity

Role of All India Kisan Sabha (AIKS) in Peasant and Land Rights Movements

The All India Kisan Sabha (AIKS) functions as the peasant or farmers' wing of the Communist Party of India (Marxist) [CPI(M)], boasting a long and robust history of mobilizing against feudal exploitation and advocating for comprehensive land reforms.¹⁶ Established in 1936, AIKS has consistently championed demands for the abolition of the Zamindari system and the equitable distribution of land to tillers, frequently resorting to direct action and mass protests to achieve its objectives.¹⁶ Its historical record includes participation in militant struggles such as the Telangana peasant revolt and strategic efforts to reclaim unused lands.¹⁹ The "Red Flag," adopted by AIKS as its banner in October 1937 ¹⁶, symbolizes this deep-rooted commitment to class struggle, the pursuit of land justice, and the principle of equality. This symbol first appeared in India with the Labour Kisan Party of Hindustan in Madras in 1923.²¹

The July 31, 2025 Protest

On July 31, 2025, AIKS orchestrated a "massive land retrieval movement" in Siruthavur village, drawing hundreds of dedicated cadres and beneficiaries, all carrying red flags [User Query]. The protest was led by Com P. Shanmugam, a prominent figure who holds the dual positions of AIKS National Vice President and CPI(M) State Secretary in Tamil Nadu.¹ Shanmugam, himself a Dalit leader, possesses a long and distinguished record of activism dedicated to the rights of tribal and Adivasi communities, notably his involvement in the Vachathi case.²² His leadership in the Siruthavur mobilization signifies the critical intersection of land, class, and caste struggles within the broader movement for social justice. Other influential leaders present at the protest included Thulasi Narayan, AIKS State Secretary ²³, and S Nambararajan, a CPM State Committee Member [User Query]. The primary objective of this powerful mobilization was unequivocally stated: to demand the long-overdue return of the 53 acres of land to the rightful Dalit families [User Query].

Symbolism of the Red Flag Movement

The prominent display of red flags and the explicit reference to the "resurgence of the Red Flag Movement" during the Siruthavur protest [User Query] connect this localized struggle to a broader, historical narrative of communist-led peasant movements across India. This "resurgence" is not merely a symbolic gesture; it indicates a strategic re-emphasis on direct action and serves as a potent warning to the state. It draws upon a historical legacy of peasant movements that, when faced with the failure of state mechanisms, resorted to militant struggles to achieve land reforms. Historically, the Red Flag has been the banner of the AIKS and associated communist parties (CPI, CPI(M)), and has been prominently used in militant peasant struggles for land reform, such as the Telangana peasant revolt, movements in Odisha, and the Naxalbari uprising.¹⁶ These movements often involved direct action, including the "capturing" of land, when legal avenues proved insufficient or state support was absent. Therefore, Comrade Shanmugam's warning that the land "will be seized under the banner of the red flag" if the state fails to act [User Query] is not empty rhetoric. It is a deliberate invocation of this historical precedent, conveying the AIKS's preparedness to escalate beyond peaceful protest to direct reclamation if bureaucratic promises are not fulfilled. This strategic move leverages historical symbolism to exert maximum pressure on the authorities.

Challenges and Determination

Despite facing state-imposed obstacles from revenue officials and police authorities, the land retrieval action in Siruthavur was carried out peacefully and with unwavering determination [User Query]. This demonstrates the significant organizational strength, discipline, and resolve of the AIKS cadres and the communities they represent, highlighting their commitment to achieving justice through sustained collective action.

VI. Immediate Outcomes and Future Prospects

Assurance from Revenue Officials

The immediate and notable outcome of the July 31, 2025, protest was a swift response from state authorities. Revenue officials "rushed to the site of the agitation" and provided assurances to the protest leaders that the land would be surveyed starting the very next day, August 1, 2025, with the entire process concluded within a week [User Query]. Furthermore, they pledged that appropriate steps would be taken to cancel the pattas (land titles) and registrations that had been made in the names of Jayalalithaa, Sasikala, and their associates [User Query].

Assessment of Current Government's Commitment

This rapid assurance, coming after 15 years of governmental inaction on the Siruthavur land dispute, powerfully demonstrates the efficacy of organized public pressure. The dramatic shift from decades of inertia to an immediate commitment within hours of a major mobilization suggests that political will, rather than legal ambiguity or administrative capacity, has been the primary impediment to justice in the Siruthavur case. The fact that the state machinery could respond so swiftly when confronted by a determined grassroots movement implies that it possessed the capability to act much earlier if the political incentive had been present. The true measure of the current government's commitment, however, will be the actual and timely implementation of these promises within the stated timeframe.

Pressure from the Movement

Com P. Shanmugam's explicit warning that if the land is not taken over by the state machinery, it will be "seized under the banner of the red flag" [User Query] signifies the movement's unwavering resolve. This statement conveys a clear willingness to escalate direct action if bureaucratic promises are not fulfilled, echoing the historical tactics employed by communist-led peasant movements in India when state mechanisms failed to deliver justice.¹⁹ The movement's continued vigilance and readiness to act will be crucial in ensuring that the recent assurances translate into concrete land restoration for the Dalit families.

VII. Broader Implications and Recommendations for Systemic Change

The Siruthavur land dispute, while a specific case, illuminates systemic issues that extend across India, particularly concerning land rights for marginalized communities and the implementation of judicial directives. Addressing these requires comprehensive policy and administrative reforms.

Policy Recommendations for Effective Land Reform Implementation

Expedited Land Restoration Mechanisms: It is imperative to establish fast-track mechanisms specifically designed for the restoration of fraudulently acquired lands belonging to Dalits and other vulnerable groups. These mechanisms should include dedicated task forces with clear timelines for action and robust accountability frameworks to ensure timely execution of judicial pronouncements and commission findings.
Digital Land Records and Transparency: Implementing comprehensive digitization of all land records is crucial. These digital records should be made publicly accessible to enhance transparency and prevent future fraudulent transactions. Such a system would significantly aid in identifying and preventing illegal transfers of assigned lands, such as "Panchami lands".¹¹
Strengthening Legal Aid and Awareness: Providing robust and accessible legal aid services is essential for Dalit communities. Concurrently, extensive awareness campaigns should be conducted to educate these communities about their land rights and available legal recourse, particularly concerning historical allotments like "Panchami lands".¹¹
Review and Enforcement of Land Ceiling Laws: A critical re-evaluation and stringent enforcement of existing land ceiling laws are necessary to ensure the equitable distribution of surplus land to landless farmers. This aligns with the long-standing demands of peasant movements and is vital for achieving agrarian justice.¹⁹

Measures to Address and Dismantle Class and Caste Biases

Sensitization and Training for State Officials: Mandatory and regular sensitization and anti-bias training programs must be implemented for all revenue, police, and judicial officials. Such training is vital to address the deep-rooted class and caste prejudices that consistently impede the delivery of justice to marginalized communities.¹³
Accountability for Inaction: Clear and enforceable accountability mechanisms should be established for government officials who fail to implement court orders or commission recommendations, especially in cases involving marginalized communities. This would help counteract administrative apathy and ensure adherence to legal mandates.
Strengthening SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act: The Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act must be rigorously enforced.¹² This includes prosecuting officials who suppress evidence, fail to register complaints, or neglect to provide protection to Dalits facing violence, intimidation, or discrimination, particularly in land-related disputes.
Community Participation in Governance: Actively promoting the participation of marginalized communities, especially Dalits and women, in local governance and land management decision-making processes is critical. This ensures that their unique perspectives and rights are adequately represented and protected in policy formulation and implementation.²⁵

Strengthening Mechanisms for Accountability and Timely Justice Delivery

Independent Oversight Bodies: The establishment of independent oversight bodies with clear mandates and powers to monitor the implementation of land reform policies and judicial orders is essential, particularly for vulnerable groups. These bodies should have the authority to investigate delays and recommend corrective actions.
Public Grievance Redressal: Creating accessible, responsive, and time-bound public grievance redressal systems is necessary. These systems should prioritize complaints related to land dispossession from marginalized communities, ensuring prompt investigation and resolution.
Role of Civil Society and Media: The vital role of civil society organizations and media in highlighting injustices and advocating for rights must be recognized, encouraged, and protected. As demonstrated by the AIKS's successful mobilization in Siruthavur, these actors are crucial in holding the state accountable and driving change.

VIII. Conclusion: A Continuing Struggle for Justice and Equality

The Siruthavur land retrieval movement stands as a powerful testament to the enduring struggle for land, justice, and dignity faced by marginalized communities in India. It highlights the persistent and often frustrating gap between progressive legal frameworks and their on-ground implementation, a disparity frequently exacerbated by entrenched class and caste biases within the state apparatus.

The AIKS-led mobilization on July 31, 2025, serves as a crucial reminder that organized grassroots movements remain an indispensable force in compelling state action and upholding constitutional values. While the immediate assurance from revenue officials in Siruthavur is a positive and welcome step, the long-term success of land restoration in this case, and in countless similar cases across the nation, will hinge on sustained political will, comprehensive systemic reforms, and an unwavering commitment to social justice. As articulated by Comrade Shanmugam, the path to true equality for Dalits is inextricably linked to securing their fundamental land rights, underscoring that the fight for land is fundamentally a fight for dignity and full citizenship.

# Top Heads

The Siruthavur Land Dispute: A Decades-Long Battle for Dalit Land Rights and the Resurgence of Grassroots Mobilization