Even as Jammu and Kashmir records a commendable decline in multidimensional poverty—dropping from 40.45 per cent in 2005-06 to a mere 2.81 per cent in 2022-23—the revelation by Union Minister for Rural Development Shivraj Singh Chouhan that five lakh people in the Union Territory still lack pucca houses casts a long shadow on this progress. It brings into sharp focus the disconnect between statistical achievements and ground realities.
The numbers are striking. Over three lakh permanent houses have been constructed in the past two years alone under the Pradhan Mantri Awas Yojana (PMAY-G), including 2.6 lakh in Jammu and 44,420 in Kashmir. While this is a laudable feat, the identification of an additional five lakh households still awaiting shelter clearly shows that the goal of “Housing for All” remains a distant dream for many.
It is important to acknowledge the Centre’s continued commitment to this cause, with the assurance that proper verification will precede allotments to prevent discrepancies. The introduction of land allotment for landless PMAY(G) beneficiaries is also a progressive step, aimed at addressing a long-standing obstacle for the most vulnerable.
However, this situation also points to systemic lapses by both present and successive governments in Jammu and Kashmir. The very fact that such a massive chunk of the population was either excluded from the original surveys or inadequately verified raises critical questions about administrative efficiency, outreach, and political will. How did these families remain invisible in an era of digitization and data-driven governance?
Despite the political leadership celebrating the success of rural empowerment schemes like the National Rural Livelihoods Mission (NRLM) and SHG-led initiatives, the basic human need for shelter has been left unfulfilled for half a million citizens. This is not just an oversight—it reflects a policy gap and a lack of proactive governance in uplifting the most deprived.
While it is reassuring to hear that a fresh survey is now underway, the process must be transparent, inclusive, and time-bound. Delays in verification or bureaucratic red tape will only deepen the disillusionment among the poor. The administration must also ensure that urban poverty pockets—often masked behind better infrastructure—are not overlooked, given the fluctuating trends in urban poverty levels over the past two decades.
In a region still healing from years of conflict and instability, the promise of a permanent roof is not merely about infrastructure—it is about dignity, security, and inclusion. The Centre and the UT administration must work in tandem, not only to plug the gaps of the past but to fast-track the fulfillment of this basic right for all citizens.
Jammu and Kashmir cannot afford to let five lakh dreams remain roofless.
