Leh (Rajeev Sharma): Climate activist Sonam Wangchuk has accused the government of targeting him and the Himalayan Institute of Alternative Learning (HIAL) whenever he raises concerns about alleged injustices in Ladakh, as a dispute over the institute’s land allotment continues before the Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court.
In a post on X on Saturday, Wangchuk alleged that government-backed media activity intensified whenever he spoke out on issues affecting the region. Referring to the controversy surrounding HIAL’s land lease, he urged authorities to address the issues he had raised rather than target the person highlighting them.
Wangchuk also shared correspondence relating to the land allotment, arguing that the documents pointed to delays on the administration’s side. He said the institute had made five written appeals, undertaken 15 visits and placed 30 calls in an effort to get the lease formalities completed on time.
Ladakh administration defends cancellation
The remarks come after the Ladakh administration defended its decision to cancel the land allotment granted to HIAL, arguing that the lease had lapsed because the required payments were not made and the lease deed was never executed.
In an affidavit submitted to the Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court, the administration maintained that the proposed 40-year lease covering 1,076 kanals and one marla at Phyang Thang had expired by operation of law on May 5, 2019.
According to the affidavit, HIAL failed to execute the lease deed or deposit the mandatory land premium within the stipulated one-year period.
The submission was filed by Romil Singh Donk, Deputy Commissioner and Chief Executive Officer of the Ladakh Autonomous Hill Development Council (LAHDC), in response to HIAL’s petition challenging the cancellation order issued on August 21, 2025.
Gitanjali Angmo questions administration’s account
Wangchuk’s wife, Gitanjali Angmo, also criticised the administration’s position, accusing officials of overlooking their own correspondence while placing responsibility for the delay on the institute.
In a post on X, Angmo said HIAL had applied for the lease on May 20, 2018, around two weeks after the land was allotted.
She said the institute wrote to the administration again in March 2020 and received a response from the Assistant Commissioner stating that the lease could not be executed because the administration had yet to finalise its lease policy.
According to Angmo, officials reiterated the same explanation in February 2021, acknowledged that other institutions had faced similar delays and allowed HIAL to continue construction.
She further stated that the institute sent another communication in July 2023, arguing that the sequence of letters and official responses contradicted the administration’s claim that HIAL was responsible for the failure to complete the lease.
Angmo questioned why the institute was being blamed for a process that, according to her account, had been held up by unresolved administrative requirements. She called for greater accountability and more effective governance in Ladakh.
Land dispute remains before the High Court
The dispute centres on whether HIAL’s land allotment lapsed because the institute failed to fulfil the prescribed conditions or whether administrative delays prevented the lease from being formally executed.
While the administration has maintained that the allotment ceased to be valid under the law, Wangchuk and Angmo have pointed to official correspondence that they say demonstrates repeated efforts to complete the process.
The High Court is examining HIAL’s challenge to the cancellation order. The competing claims place the administration’s handling of the lease and the institute’s compliance with the allotment conditions at the heart of the dispute.
Wangchuk’s latest remarks have brought renewed attention to the controversy, with both sides presenting differing accounts of why the land lease was never finalised.
