Ladakh gets 100 council seats; autonomy talks remain unresolved

Ladakh’s lieutenant governor administration notified 100 elected constituencies across eight hill councils on October 21, expanding the existing total of 52 elected seats as the Centre pursues a restructuring of local government. The administration presents the changes as a way to broaden representation and make grassroots governance more inclusive.

According to India Today’s October 22 report, the administration also dissolved the Kargil hill council on October 21, while the State Election Commission issued a notification proposing panchayat elections in November. The measures come as negotiations with the Leh Apex Body (LAB) and Kargil Democratic Alliance (KDA) over constitutional safeguards remain unresolved.

Both groups oppose the amended council framework. Their central objection is that increasing the number of representatives does not necessarily increase elected institutions’ authority, particularly when planning, regulatory and financial decisions remain subject to the lieutenant governor’s administration.

More councils, with powers defined by a new framework

The Union Cabinet approved the changes on October 14. President Droupadi Murmu promulgated the LAHDC (Amendment) Regulation, 2026, on October 16, and the administration notified it on October 20. The changes to the 1997 council law cover membership, elections, tenure, administrative authority and finances.

Lieutenant Governor Vinai Kumar Saxena announced the constituency distribution as 22 for Leh, 21 for Kargil, 13 for Sankoo, 10 for Changthang, nine each for Nubra, Sham and Zanskar, and seven for Drass.

Under the reported provisions, the administration can set each council’s elected membership between seven and 24 and nominate up to four additional members. The councils will exercise district-level panchayat powers. District plans must comply with administrative guidelines, and council bye-laws require the lieutenant governor’s approval.

The expansion follows the creation of Sham, Nubra, Changthang, Zanskar and Drass districts on April 27 and their inauguration on April 30. Sankoo became Ladakh’s eighth district on October 16.

Administration cites representation; groups question autonomy

The administration rejects the contention that the overhaul undermines local government, describing it instead as a long-needed modernisation. Its stated case rests on bringing elected representation to all eight districts and widening participation.

LAB co-chairman Chering Dorjey Labrook and KDA co-chairman Sajjad Kargili argue that the amendments were introduced without adequate consultation while the larger political settlement was still being discussed. They say the new arrangements weaken councils previously recognised as autonomous bodies.

Labrook also alleges that authority over land has shifted towards the lieutenant governor and that the framework could constrain a future Union Territory-level elected body. Kargili argues that administrative approval requirements limit meaningful financial and planning autonomy. These are the leaders’ assessments of the changes, rather than independently established legal conclusions.

Kargili further contends that allowing elected council strength to vary between seven and 24 creates scope for electoral manipulation. That concern does not establish that constituencies have actually been manipulated.

Negotiations stalled over the scope of an elected body

Subcommittee talks in Leh on October 15 ended without agreement. LAB and KDA rejected a 32-page Ministry of Home Affairs draft, saying it fell short of assurances they believed had emerged from earlier discussions.

According to the groups, the draft proposed a Territorial Council-style arrangement rather than an elected assembly or protections under Article 371. They maintain that, at a May 22 meeting in New Delhi, the Centre had accepted the idea of a directly elected Union Territory-level institution with legislative, executive, budgetary and financial authority. That account of an earlier commitment remains their claim; the reporting does not establish it through an agreed meeting record.

Labrook said the groups had sent a fresh proposal setting out their objections and demands. Another round of discussions expected on October 22 did not take place, with neither organisation receiving an invitation or a revised schedule, the report said.

The groups continue to seek constitutional safeguards for land, culture, language and resources through the Sixth Schedule or a provision similar to Article 371, alongside a directly elected Union Territory-level legislative institution with substantive powers.

Unresolved demands and the prospect of renewed protests

The dispute has its roots in the political arrangements that followed Ladakh’s separation from Jammu and Kashmir in 2019. Union Territory status initially drew support, but the absence of a legislative assembly subsequently became a focus of concern about local decision-making and the authority of the lieutenant governor and bureaucracy.

Four people were killed and dozens injured during protests in Leh in September 2025, according to the report. A year later, the differences over constitutional protection and elected authority remain unsettled.

Labrook has warned that agitation could resume unless the demands for a meaningful Union Territory-level legislature and Article 371 safeguards are addressed. For now, the administration is proceeding with the council overhaul, while LAB and KDA maintain that district-level elections cannot substitute for agreement on the wider distribution of political power.