







































Ecology, Economy and Society–the INSEE Journal 6(1): 123-131, January 2023 

INSIGHTS FROM THE FIELD 

Measuring Impermanence: A Community Perspective 
on Char Land  

Hassan Momin* and Gorky Chakraborty** 

I. INTRODUCING IMPERMANENCE 

Multiple factors associated with rivers, namely, their meandering course, 
braided nature, slope and incline, and quantum of bed-load and sediment-
load, act together over the course of floods to facilitate the process of char 
(mid-channel river bar) formation (Osterkamp 1998; Rahman and Rahman 
2012; Momin and Chakraborty 2021). Normally, these chars are irregular in 
shape and unstable in nature; their size, shape, and location change 
frequently as well (Wyrick and Klingeman 2010). As they are formed under 
flood conditions, their natural height is never higher than the height of the 
highest flood—while the slope of the upstream end is generally steep, the 
downstream part is gentle and covered with ripples and larger bed forms 
(Bhagabati 2001). The recession of floodwater—that is, when the velocity 
of flow and the capacity of the river to remove these deposits reduce—silt 
is deposited, which in due course, get covered with grass and vegetation. 
During the next flood, the chars are again submerged in water, either 
resulting in changes in area or greater deposition of silt (Chakraborty 2009). 
However, whatever their life span may be, the ecosystem surrounding the 
chars is truly unique. Their soil is largely composed of alluvium, freshly 
deposited by the river, with a little humus that allows the growth of river 
grasses (Chakraborty 2009). Chars may be classified into various types 
based on several parameters (Figure 1).  

The existential realities of chars and their impermanence escape standard 
terra firma interpretations of land and water. Rather, chars are broadly 

 
* Research Scholar, Institute of Development Studies Kolkata (IDSK), 
hassanmomin4@gmail.com  

** Faculty, Institute of Development Studies Kolkata (IDSK) 27-D, DD Block, Sector-1, Salt 

Lake, Kolkata-700064, gorky8bob@gmail.com  

Copyright © Momin and Chakraborty 2023. Released under Creative Commons Attribution 
© NonCommercial 4.0 International licence (CC BY-NC 4.0) by the author.  
Published by Indian Society for Ecological Economics (INSEE), c/o Institute of  Economic 
Growth, University Enclave, North Campus, Delhi 110007.  

ISSN: 2581–6152 (print); 2581–6101 (web).  

DOI: https://doi.org/10.37773/ees.v6i1.808  

mailto:hassanmomin4@gmail.com
mailto:gorky8bob@gmail.com
https://doi.org/10.37773/ees.v6i1.808


 Ecology, Economy and Society–the INSEE Journal [124] 

understood as riverine lands (Lahiri-Dutt 2014a) that transcend the land–
water boundary and thereby should be interpreted using wet theory 
(Appadurai and Breckenridge 2009) rather than conventional conceptual 
understandings. In South Asia, the chars, despite their impermanence, are 
areas of adaptive human habitation and diverse cultivation (Sarker et al. 
2003). In the Brahmaputra flood plains, char dwellers have a unique 
migration pattern. Those who inhabit a relatively more erosion-prone char 
seek to move to a more stable one, while others expressed a willingness to 
migrate to chars that were closer to riverbanks. Meanwhile, a large number 
of char dwellers reported that in cases of severe erosion, they were left with 
no other option but to migrate to kayam (settled) areas as daily wage 
labourers (Chakraborty 2009). Scholars have observed similar migratory 
patterns in other river systems, such as the Ganga, Damodar, Padma, and 
Jamuna (Baqee, 1998; Islam et al. 2010; Lahiri-Dutt and Samanta 2013; 
Lahiri-Dutt 2014b; Chakraborty 2017). 

Figure 1: Classification of Char/River Island 

 

Source: Adapted from NPC (1986); Bhattacharjee et al. (1991); Wyrick and 
Klingeman (2010) 

 

2. LEGISLATING IMPERMANENCE 

One of the earliest legal enactments regarding land in char areas was the 
Bengal Alluvion and Diluvion Regulation, 1825. Section 4(3) of this 
regulation states that when  

a char or island is thrown up in a large navigable river (the bed of 
which is not the property of an individual), or in the sea, and the 
channel of the river or sea between such island and the shore may 



[125] Momin and Chakraborty 

not be fordable, it shall according to established usage, be at the 
disposal of the government. (Ganguly 1999, 273)  

But if the “channel between such island and the shore is fordable during 
any season of the year, it shall be considered an accession to the land, 
tenure or tenures of the person or persons may be most contiguous to it, 
subject to several provisions” (Ganguly 1999, 273). While the regulation 
defines a char and its ownership broadly, complications arise due to the 
impermanence of chars, as a result of which access, occupancy, and 
ownership of land remain uncertain. This often gives rise to discord and 
violent conflicts among char dwellers (Rahaman 2018; Momin 2020). 
Litigations under such circumstances are sought to be addressed using the 
morals of “justice, equity, customs, and good conscience” (Chakraborty 
2009, 113–114). 

Interestingly, several legislations—for instance, The Bengal Alluvion and 
Diluvion Regulation, 1825; Assam Land and Revenue Regulation, 1886; 
The Goalpara Tenancy Act, 1929; The Tripura Land Revenue and Land 
Reforms Act, 1960; West Bengal Land Reforms Act (WBLRA), 1956; and 
The Assam Temporarily Settled Areas Tenancy Act, 1971—fall short of 
providing a definitive interpretation of the land that emerges again in situ 
(Chakraborty 2009). It is true that there is a broad specification that if the 
eroded land reappears in 20 years, the existing holder continues to hold the 
title. However, there are overlaps on the issue of revenue payment 
continuity, the authority who can proclaim reduction or remission of land 
revenue, and so on, which complicate the process of verifying claims 
concerning settlements on land emerging through accretion. 

Given the lack of specific regulatory provisions for the re-emerged chars, 
observations from a study conducted by The Law Research Institute, 
Guwahati (1982), seems interesting. “When a new char is thrown up in the 
Brahmaputra, it is taken to be the property of the state government, which 
either keeps it as grazing reserve or settle it with the cultivators as per the 
Land Settlement Policy Resolution in force.” It further goes on to elucidate 
that “in reality, people do not wait till the systematic settlement of the 
Government. They immediately occupy the newly formed char.” Now, as it 
happens without the sanction of state authorities, “they are regarded as 
encroachers and they remain to be so until their land is settled under land 
settlement provisions or the char gets submerged in the river.” 

The existence of several land revenue settlement deeds for the chars of 
different states in India complicates the matter further. In Assam, one 
generally comes across three different patterns, namely, touzi, ekchonia, and, 
rarely, meadi. Land that is yet to be settled or allotted by the government is 



 Ecology, Economy and Society–the INSEE Journal [126] 

known as khas. Users do not enjoy ownership rights over touzi land, but 
they have the right to use it by paying the required land revenue, either as 
touzi khazana (for allotted government land) or as bedakhali jarimana (for 
unallotted/occupied government land). The state may order the occupant 
to vacate touzi land if it has not been allotted by the government. If an 
individual has inhabited the land for a long time, it may be converted into 
ek chonia or an annual lease. The annual lease is issued for one year and does 
not confer on the owner the right of transfer or sub-letting, and the right of 
inheritance is limited to the particular year of issue. Periodic leases or meadi 
patta are rare in the char areas of the Brahmaputra, and those that exist 
largely pertain to those chars that were once a part of the mainland but got 
detached due to a change in the course of the river. A periodic lease confers 
the right of both transfer and inheritance at least up to the period of next 
settlement. In West Bengal, land in char areas is administered under three 
settlement types—khas, where the ownership is vested with the state; patta 
land, where khas land is distributed to landless families and they are 
provided a title deed; and rayati land, which is privately owned and generally 
inherited (Chakraborty 2009). 

3. LIVING THE IMPERMANENCE 

This section deals with an exercise that was initiated at the community level 
to identify ownership/occupancy of land that emerged through accretion in 
River Ganga in Kaliachak-II Block of Malda district in West Bengal. We 
observed that the community plays an important role in trying to resolve 
complications arising due to accretion.  

According to local resident Asraful Sk,  

If any conflict arises regarding ownership rights in char lands, we 
first try to settle it within the claimants. Decisions are 
primarily taken by respected people, usually elders with such 
experiences in our community. Religion or caste does not play any 
role in determining the occupancy of the lost land in the chars. 
(Field survey, January 5, 2020) 

He further adds, “Here, erosion–accretion is a continuous process, and 
identifying land in terms of prior occupancy is a complicated process.” 
According to another respondent, Lotifur Rahman, 

Powerful people from nearby areas sometimes attempt to grab the 
newly emerged char land. But, if the original inhabitants are able to 
lay claim to their land, the community elders intervene to facilitate 
a meaningful resolution. However, if the elders find it difficult, 



[127] Momin and Chakraborty 

local amins [land surveyors] are involved to decide on the fate of the 
land. (Field survey, January 5, 2020) 

It was further observed that those char dwellers who have migrated to 
urban or distant locations to secure their livelihoods seldom lay claim to 
land, in which case, occupying such land becomes an easier option.  

Section 11 (1) of the WBLRA (1956) was later modified to say   

if rayat loses a land or a portion of the land by diluvion and the land 
re-emerges within a time period of 20 years then the land proper 
title, name and interest of land subsists with the rayat. In this case 
the rayat has the right to possess and thereafter will be responsible 
to pay revenue. The revenue officer will decide the revenue of the 
re-emerged land as regarded compatible in accordance with the law. 
It should be based on certain time period regarding claims over the 
diluviated land. (WBLRA 1956). 

However, according to the law, an owner who has lost land in the river can 
summon the local amin, if the land resurfaces somewhere in the river within 
20 years, to chalk out and claim the approximate area of lost land and settle 
and cultivate there. 

We came across a local amin who described the process to us and allowed 
us to observe a real land settlement at the community level, as land had 
emerged through accretion (in the west) after the River Ganga had eroded 
areas on its east bank. According to this 73-year-old local Hurmot Ali,  

in 1963, we all met and decided to make a boundary with pillars 
around the Kaliachak-II Diara (char) belt. We erected one concrete 
pillar at the place which was the last point from the Bengal side in 
terms of the Bengal–Bihar border (presently Jharkhand) of the 
River Ganga (near Udhwa Nala). Another concrete pillar was 
erected at Islampur village (which was submerged later). (Field 
survey, January 7, 2020) 

Ali, in an excited tone, stated that “the entire exercise took about one year 
to complete but in the process the land in the Diara was marked, measured, 
and identified.” The amin recalled, “One of our villagers, Durun Babu, 
undertook the operation of measuring the land from the Udhwa Nala end, 
while from Islampur side, Radhika Babu took charge. So, from two points 
at both the ends, the measurement of the Diara belt was initiated. This was 
completed in 1964.” Ali explained that once this process was over, they 
“collated the daag [a unique number allotted to each plot of surveyed land] 
and khatiyan [individual land record certificate] numbers, and the entire land 
was thereby fully mapped and marked.” Thereafter, in case of any dispute, 



 Ecology, Economy and Society–the INSEE Journal [128] 

elders from the community come together to decide on the ownership of 
land through accretion on the basis of the markers of 1963–1964. The char 
dwellers were no longer dependent on the whims of the officials of the land 
revenue department regarding settlement of ownership/occupancy of land 
that emerges through accretion. 

4. MEASURING IMPERMANENCE 

We came across an exercise whereby traditional/community amins 
conducted surveys to pinpoint the location of the new chars and their 
former occupants. To measure land, and ascertain the location and 
ownership of the newly emerged land, these instruments/tools were used: 
plain table, spirit level, alidade, cadastral map, pencil, scale, measuring tape 
or chain, and flag. 

As observed, the process involved the following steps (Figure 2). Measuring 
is initiated by locating a pre-existing point (A) on the ground in the settled 
land, whose daag and khatiyan numbers have already been determined—
known as the “cadastral point” (Fig 2a) on the map. This is followed by 
setting up a fixed point or station or flag (B) near the riverbank (Fig 2b). 
Flag B has to be visible through the alidade from station A. Thereafter, the 
distance between station A and B is measured with tape on the ground and 
drawn as a line on the cadastral map using the scale specified on it. Stations 
C and D are drawn from B at an equal distance (Fig 2c), and the baseline 
(CD) is drawn on the cadastral map by converting the ground distance 
according to the scale used in the cadastral map. The next step is to fix 
another ground station (E) in the newly emerged char (Fig 2d). This is 
calculated from stations C and D using the alidade, thereby determining 
station E as the point of intersection between lines CE and DE on the map 
(Fig 2e). The following step is to obtain the measurement in real terms by 
calculating the distance between B and E. As points B and E are 
inaccessible, they are added at scale to the cadastral map. The distance 
between B and E is measured and converted to the scale of the cadastral 
map. The calculated distance is the ground distance between stations B and 
E. The final step is to plot out the char land. Here, the amin moves the 
plane table on the char to point E. Point E is subsequently identified at a 
specific point on the cadastral map. First, the amin measures the plot on 
which E is placed and then marks the remaining plots (Fig 2g). To skip the 
first two steps, the amin inserts a half-burned wooden pole deep into the 
ground near the riverbank for future reference (Fig 2h). They also use it to 
locate further diluviated land that emerges in the char or adjacent chars. 
The estimation of char areas by traditional amins is based solely on the 
cadastral survey maps (Fig 2i) of the land revenue department. 



[129] Momin and Chakraborty 

Figure 2: (a–g) Measurement of Char Land; h) Deep-rooted Wooden Block; i) 
Referenced Cadastral Map (Prepared by the Land Revenue Department, 
Government of West Bengal, 1954–1957) 

 

Source: Field survey (2020) 

5. CONFLICTING CONCLUSIONS ON IMPERMANENCE 

After this arduous community exercise, the newly emerged char land was 
settled with the prior occupants of the land, which otherwise would not 
have been possible due to the lack of will of the revenue authorities to 
travel and undertake such a survey for the settlement of land gained 
through accretion. It was therefore a community exercise facilitated by 
traditional amins at Jot Kasturi village in Kaliachak-II Block in Malda. Once 
this exercise was completed, the char dwellers went to the revenue office 
and informed them that their settlement had been properly marked on a 
cadastral map. To consolidate their claims, the owners of the newly settled 
land expressed eagerness to pay revenue. To our surprise, the officials 
announced, “All this land is now vested land and no one is allowed to take 
possession or pay revenue for such land” (Field survey, January 2020). They 
further expressed displeasure at the ignorance of the char dwellers, saying, 



 Ecology, Economy and Society–the INSEE Journal [130] 

“All land that emerged as River Island has become khas land after the 
government order issued in 2000” (Field survey, January 2020). This new 
act (Section 12 of WBLRA, 2000) specifies, “any land gained by the gradual 
accession to a plot of land, from within the recess of a river or of the sea, 
shall vest in the State Government and the rayat who owns the plot of land 
shall not be entitled to retain such land as an accretion thereto.” 

This entire community exercise and settlement along with the rebuttal by 
revenue officials suggests that a binary understanding of land and water 
regarding char areas persists. This is further complicated by a forked vision 
between the state and the communities that dwell in these areas. Until a 
hybrid understanding evolves based on the existential realities of the lived 
experiences of char dwellers, ignorance may rule the roost in place of 
knowledge production.  

REFERENCES 

Appadurai, Arjun, and Carol A Breckenridge. 2009. “Wet Theory.” In SOAK: 
Mumbai in an Estuary, edited by Anuradha Mathur and Dilip Da Cunha. New Delhi: 
Rupa & Co. 

Baqee, Abdul. 1998. Peopling in the Land of Allah Jaane. Power, Peopling and Environment: 
The Case of Char-Lands of Bangladesh. Dhaka: The University Press Ltd. 

Bhagabati, Abani Kumar. 2001. “Biodiversity and Associated Problems in the 
Islands of the Brahmaputra, Assam.” Geographical Review of India 63 (4): 330–343. 

Bhattacharjee, I, R Borgohain, and RR Jha. 1991. Diara Lands – The Grannary of 
Assam, Jorhat: Assam. Jorhat: Agriculture University. 

Chakraborty, Gorky. 2009. Assam’s Hinterland: Society and Economy in the Char Areas. 
New Delhi: Akansha Publishing House. 

—. 2017. “The Char Dwellers of Assam: Flowing River, Floating People.” In Water 
Conflicts in Northeast India, edited by KJ Joy, Partha J Das, Gorky Chakraborty, 
Chandan Mahanta, Suhas Paranjape, and Shruti Vispute, 178–-192. India: 
Routledge. 

Ganguly, Kalyanmoy Justice, ed. 1999. The West Bengal Laws (Annotated), Vol I. 
Calcutta: Hindustan Law Book Company. 

Islam, Shafi Noor, Shilpa Singh, Hasibush Shaheed, and Shouke Wei. 2010. 
“Settlement Relocations in the Char-Lands of Padma River Basin in Ganges Delta, 
Bangladesh.” Frontiers of Earth Science in China 4 (4): 393–402. 
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11707-010-0122-5.  

Lahiri-Dutt, Kuntala. 2014a. “Beyond the Water-Land Binary in Geography: 
Water/Lands of Bengal Re-visioning Hybridity” ACME: An International Journal for 
Critical Geographies 13 (3): 505–29. 

Lahiri-Dutt, Kuntala. 2014b. “Islands that Float within Rivers.” ANU Research 
Publications 8 (2): 17. 

https://doi.org/10.1007/s11707-010-0122-5


[131] Momin and Chakraborty 

Lahiri-Dutt, Kuntala, and Gopa Samanta. 2013. Dancing with the River: People 
and Life on the Chars of South Asia. New Haven/London: Yale University Press. 
https://doi.org/10.12987/yale/9780300188301.001.0001.  

Law Research Institute. 1982. “A Study of the Land Systems of North Eastern 
Region, Gauhati.” Law Research Institute 1: 124–126. 

Momin, Hassan. 2020. “River Dynamics and Uncertainties: A Case Study of 
Kaliachak-II Block in Malda District, West Bengal.” M.Phil. diss., Institute of 
Development Studies Kolkata, University of Calcutta. https://idsk-
opac.l2c2.co.in/cgi-bin/koha/opac-detail.pl?biblionumber=23176.  

Momin, Hassan, and Gorky Chakraborty. 2021. “Morphological Changes in the 
Hazardous Zones of the Ganga and the Brahmaputra Rivers in East and Northeast 
India.” Applied Geomatics 13 (4): 925–944. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12518-021-
00395-y.  

NPC. 1986. Survey Report on Char Area Development in Assam (Barpeta, Dhubri, 
Goalpara Districts). Guwahati: National Productivity Council. 

Osterkamp, WR. 1998. “Processes of Fluvial Island Formation, with Examples 
from Plum Creek, Colorado and Snake River, Idaho.” Wetlands 18 (4): 530–545. 
https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03161670.  

Rahaman, Matiur. 2018. “Ownership of Land in Select Chars of the River Ganga.” 
M.Phil. diss., Institute of Development Studies Kolkata, University of Calcutta. 
https://idsk-opac.l2c2.co.in/cgi-bin/koha/opac-detail.pl?biblionumber=22637.  

Rahman, Mohammad Arifur, and Munsur Rahman. 2012. “Char Formation 
Process and Livelihood Characteristics of Char Dwellers of Alluvial River in 
Bangladesh.” ICSE6, Paris. 

Sarker, Maminul Haque, Iffat Huque, Mustafa Alam, and Rob Koudstaal. 2003. 
“Rivers, Chars and Char Dwellers of Bangladesh.” International Journal of River Basin 
Management 1 (1): 61–80. https://doi.org/10.1080/15715124.2003.9635193.  

WBLRA. 1956. West Bengal Land Reforms Act, Calcutta. Government of West 
Bengal. 

WBLRA. 2000. West Bengal Land Reforms Act, Calcutta. Government of West 
Bengal. 

 

 

 

 

https://doi.org/10.12987/yale/9780300188301.001.0001
https://idsk-opac.l2c2.co.in/cgi-bin/koha/opac-detail.pl?biblionumber=23176
https://idsk-opac.l2c2.co.in/cgi-bin/koha/opac-detail.pl?biblionumber=23176
https://doi.org/10.1007/s12518-021-00395-y
https://doi.org/10.1007/s12518-021-00395-y
https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03161670
https://idsk-opac.l2c2.co.in/cgi-bin/koha/opac-detail.pl?biblionumber=22637
https://doi.org/10.1080/15715124.2003.9635193

