The Ladakh administration defended cancelling land allotted to Sonam Wangchuk's HIAL before the High Court. The dispute turns on alleged lease defaults, unpaid dues and contested official claims.Stock photo used for illustrationLeh,Oct 22, 2026 19:24 ISTThe Ladakh administration has defended its decision to cancel the land allotted to activist Sonam Wangchuk's Himalayan Institute of Alternative Learning (HIAL), saying the allotment had automatically lapsed because mandatory payments were not made and a lease deed was not signed, news agency Press Trust of India reported.In an affidavit filed before the High Court of Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh, the administration said the 40-year lease for 1,076 kanals and 1 marla of land at Phyang Thang had “lapsed by operation of law” on May 5, 2019.
HIAL CEO Gitanjali Angmo denied the administration's claims when PTI approached her for comment.The 136-page affidavit was filed by Leh Deputy Commissioner and Ladakh Autonomous Hill Development Council CEO Romil Singh Donk in response to HIAL's petition challenging the August 21, 2025, order cancelling the land allotment.The administration described the petition as “misconceived, devoid of merit, and barred by delay and laches”. It said the original allotment order, issued on May 5, 2018, was conditional and clearly stated that the lease would be deemed cancelled if the allottee failed to sign the deed within a year.
According to the affidavit, HIAL did not pay any land premium or ground rent and failed to obtain formal possession through the tehsildar as required. The administration also said the Union Territory's Higher Education Department certified in October 2026 that HIAL was not a recognised university and its courses were not affiliated with the University of Ladakh or any other statutory body.The affidavit also referred to the past conduct of Wangchuk and his organisation, the Students' Educational and Cultural Movement of Ladakh (SECMOL).
It alleged that SECMOL had occupied 124 kanals of state land at Phey for more than three decades without a formal allotment or payment of an assessed premium of Rs 80 lakh. It cited the violent protests in Leh in September 2025, the Union Home Ministry's subsequent intervention, the cancellation of SECMOL's Foreign Contribution Regulation Act registration and Wangchuk's brief detention under the National Security Act before it was revoked in March 2026.
The administration presented these events as part of what it called a pattern of public order disruptions.Citing a Home Ministry order dated September 25, 2025, the affidavit said SECMOL's foreign funding registration was cancelled over several alleged legal violations. These included accepting funds from a Swedish donor for a study concerning India's sovereignty, which was considered harmful to the national interest.The administration said local residents, the Phyang Welfare Society and village nambardars had repeatedly approached the authorities since 2018.
They alleged that promises related to the university project had not been kept, ancient irrigation streams had been diverted without permission for “Ice Stupa” experiments, and an additional 174 kanals had been encroached upon beyond the boundary wall.According to the affidavit, villagers alleged that HIAL had misled them with promises of a world-class university, blocked old pasture land and repeatedly diverted centuries-old natural irrigation streams for Ice Stupa projects, causing a severe water shortage for local farmers.Urging the court to dismiss the petition, the administration alleged that HIAL had made false statements under oath by claiming that it had sent repeated reminders during the first year and paid all required dues. It submitted records that, it said, showed no written communication between May 2018 and March 2020 and no payments.The affidavit also referred to letters written by HIAL in June 2020 seeking a complete waiver of the premium and ground rent.
The administration said this request was never approved and the letters had not been disclosed in the petition.Referring to official records dating to 2006, the administration cited an October 2006 communication from the then Leh district magistrate. The communication recorded an allegation that Wangchuk had openly threatened the Hill Council and district administration during a council meeting, prompting officials to recommend surveillance and preventive detention.The affidavit also cited March 2007 orders in which the district magistrate banned public gatherings, speeches and the circulation of what were described as provocative video discs by SECMOL.
According to the affidavit, the orders alleged that the organisation was carrying out large-scale anti-establishment propaganda that threatened public peace and was collecting money from the public without authorisation.Reports from the chief education officer in April 2007 alleged that Wangchuk had occupied 200 kanals of land without authorisation in the name of educational programmes and had disrupted the functioning of the education department.The administration told the court that this alleged pattern of occupying public land without paying government dues had continued over the years, including at SECMOL's Phey campus. It said 1,076 kanals of state land had now been held for more than six years without a valid lease or payment of the premium and ground rent.The affidavit further alleged that recent agitations led and incited by Wangchuk ended with the office of the chief executive councillor of the Hill Council, which had originally allotted the land, being set on fire.It also accused Wangchuk of inciting a mob through speeches during a hunger strike on September 24, 2025.
According to the affidavit, the violence resulted in political party offices being burnt, police vehicles being set on fire and more than 30 security personnel being injured.The administration argued that a petitioner with such a record had not approached the court with “clean hands” and was not entitled to discretionary or equitable relief. It also rejected the relevance of the awards, visits by guests and international recognition cited by Wangchuk in his petition.Personal eminence and accolades were “wholly irrelevant” to whether the lease conditions had been followed, the affidavit said.
It added that no recognition, however distinguished, could replace compliance with the legal conditions governing the allotment and alleged that reliance on such honours was an attempt to divert attention from the default.The administration said public land was held in trust for the people and could not be distributed as private largesse. It asked the court to dismiss HIAL's petition with costs and suggested that the reclaimed land be allotted to reputed national institutions such as a Sainik School, an Eklavya Model Residential School or Sindhu Central University.The case centres on the administration's claim that HIAL failed to sign the lease deed and pay mandatory dues within the stipulated period, while the institute has denied the allegations and challenged the cancellation of the land allotment before the high court.- Ends