VIP Independent Call Girls in Mira Bhayandar 🌹 9920725232 ( Call Me ) Mumbai ...
Land acquisition bill in india 2015
1. 1
Land acquisition in India
2015
Land acquisition in India refers to the
process by which the union or a state
government in India acquires private land
for the purpose of Industrialization,
development of infrastructuralfacilities or
urbanization of the private land, and
provides compensation to the affected land
owners and their rehabilitation and
resettlement.
Land acquisition in India is governed by
the Right to Fair Compensation and
Transparency in Land Acquisition,
Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013
and which came into force from 1 January
2014. Till 2013, land acquisition in India
was governed by Land Acquisition Act of
1894. On 31 December 2014, the President
of India promulgated an ordinance with an
2. 2
official mandate to "meet the twin
objectives of farmer welfare along with
expeditiously meeting the strategic and
developmental needs of the country". An
amendment bill was then introduced in
Parliament to endorse the Ordinance. Lok
Sabha passed the bill but the same is still
lying for passage by the Rajya Sabha. On
30 May 2015,President of India
promulgated the amendment ordinance for
third time Union Government of India has
also made and notified the Right to Fair
Compensation and Transparency in Land
Acquisition, Rehabilitation and
Resettlement (Social Impact Assessment
and Consent) Rules, 2014 under the Act to
regulate the procedure. The land
acquisition in Jammu and Kashmir is
governed by the Jammu and Kashmir Land
Acquisition Act, 1934.
3. 3
Purpose
As per the Act, the union or state
governments can acquire lands for its own
use, hold and control, including for public
sector undertakings and for "public
purpose", and shall include the following
purposes:
for strategic purposes relating to naval,
military, air force, and armed forces of
the Union, including central
paramilitary forces or any work vital to
national security or defence of India or
State police, safety of the people
for infrastructure projects as defined
under the Act
project for project affected families
4. 4
project for housing for such income
groups, as may be specified from time
to time by the appropriate Government
project for planned development or the
improvement of village sites or any site
in the urban areas or provision of land
for residential purposes for the weaker
sections in rural and urban areas
project for residential purposes to the
poor or landless or to persons residing
in areas affected by naturalcalamities,
or to persons displaced or affected by
reason of the implementation of any
scheme undertaken by the Government,
any local authority or a corporation
owned or controlled by the State.
The land can be acquired for private bodies
for certain purposes:
For public private partnership projects,
where the ownership of the land
continues to vest with the Government,
for public purpose as defined in the Act
5. 5
For private companies for public
purpose.
Issues
Some of the important issues surrounding
the Land Acquisition are discussed below.
The major land acquisition and conflicts
happen in the densely populated areas of
the countryside.
Eminent Domain
The power to take property from the
individual is rooted in the idea of eminent
domain. The doctrine of eminent domain
states, the sovereign can do anything, if the
act of sovereign involves public interest.
The doctrine empowers the sovereign to
acquire private land for a public use,
provided the public nature of the usage can
be demonstrated beyond doubt. The
6. 6
doctrine is based on the following two
Latin maxims, (1) Salus populi suprema
lex (Welfare of the People Is the
ParamountLaw) and (2) Necessitas
publica major est quam (Public Necessity
Is Greater Than Private Necessity). In the
history of modern India, this doctrine was
challenged twice (broadly speaking) once
when land reform was initiated and
another time when Banks were
nationalized.
The Constitution of India originally
provided the right to property (which
includes land) under Articles 19 and 31.
Article 19 guaranteed that all citizens have
the right to acquire, hold and dispose of
property. Article 31 stated that "no person
shall be deprived of his property save by
authority of law." It also indicated that
compensation would be paid to a person
whose property has been taken for public
purposes (often subject to wide range of
7. 7
meaning). The Forty-Fourth Amendment
of 1978 deleted the right to property from
the list of fundamental rights with an
introduction of a new provision, Article
300-A, which provided that "no person
shall be deprived of his property save by
authority of law" (Constitution 44th
Amendment, w.e.f. 10.6.1979).The
amendment ensured that the right to
property‟ is no more a fundamental right
but rather a constitutional/legal right/as a
statutory right and in the event of breach,
the remedy available to an aggrieved
person is through the High Court under
Article 226 of the Indian Constitution and
not the Supreme Court under Article 32 of
the Constitution.
State must pay compensation at the market
value for such land, building or structure
acquired (Inserted by Constitution,
Seventeenth Amendment) Act, 1964, the
same can be found in the earlier rulings
8. 8
when property right was a fundamental
right which propounded that the word
"Compensation", that is the market value
of the property at the time of the
acquisition. The Legislature must "ensure
that what is determined as payable must be
compensation, that is, a just equivalent of
what the owner has been deprived of".
Elsewhere, Justice, Reddy, O Chinnappa
ruled (State Of Maharashtra v.
Chandrabhan Tale on 7 July 1983) that the
fundamentalright to property has been
abolished because of its incompatibility
with the goals of "justice" social, economic
and political and "equality of status and of
opportunity" and with the establishment of
"a socialist democratic republic, as
contemplated by the Constitution. There is
no reason why a new concept of property
should be introduced in the place of the old
so as to bring in its wake the vestiges of
the doctrine of Laissez Faire and create, in
the name of efficiency, a new oligarchy.
9. 9
Efficiency has many facets and one is yet
to discover an infallible test of efficiency
to suit the widely differing needs of a
developing society such as ours". The
concept of efficiency has been introduced
by Justice Reddy, O Chinnappa, very
interestingly coupled with the condition of
infallibility.
In India, with this introduction of ‘social’
elements to the property rights, a new
phase had begun. K. K. Mathew, justice of
Kesavananda Bharativs State of Kerala
stated this precisely: "Property in
consumable goods or means of production
worked by their owners (use aspects of
property) were justified as necessary
condition of a free and purposeful life; but
when property gave power not only over
things but through things over persons
(power aspect of property) also, it was not
justified as it was an instrument of
servitude rather than freedom".
10. 10
Legislative changes
The 2013 Act focuses on providing not
only compensation to the land owners, but
also extend rehabilitation and resettlement
benefits to livelihood looser from the land,
which shall be in addition to the minimum
compensation. The minimum
compensation to be paid to the land owners
is based on a multiple of market value and
other factors laid down in the Act. The Act
forbids or regulates land acquisition when
such acquisition would include multi-crop
irrigated area. The Act changed the norms
for acquisition of land for use by private
companies or in case of public-private
partnerships,including compulsory
approval of 80% of the landowners. The
11. 11
Act also introduced changes in the land
acquisition process, including a
compulsory social-impact study, which
need to be conducted before an acquisition
is made.
The new law, also has some serious
shortcomings as regards its provisions for
socioeconomic impact assessment and it
has also bypassed the constitutional local
Self Government by not recognizing them
as "appropriate governments" in matters of
land acquisition.
Monetary compensation
Major Indian infrastructure projects such
as the Yamuna Expressway have paid
about INR 2800 crores (US$500 million)
for land, or over US$25,000 per acre
12. 12
between 2007 and 2009. For context
purposes, this may be compared with land
prices elsewhere in the world:
According to The Financial Times, in
2008, the farmland prices in France
were Euro 6,000 per hectare ($2,430
per acre; IN Rs. 1,09,350 per acre).
According to the United States
Department of Agriculture, as of
January 2010,the average farmland
value in the United States was $2,140
per acre (IN Rs. 96,300 per acre). The
farmland prices in the United States
varied between different parts of the
country, ranging between $480 per acre
to $4,690 per acre.
A 2010 report by the Government of India,
on labor whose livelihood depends on
agricultural land, claims that, per 2009
data collected across all states in India, the
all-India annualaverage daily wage rates
in agricultural occupations ranged between
13. 13
IN Rs. 53 to 117 per day for men working
in farms (US$354 to 780 per year), and
between IN Rs. 41 to 72 per day for
women working in farms (US$274 to 480
per year). This wage rate in rural India
study included the following agricultural
operations common in India: ploughing,
sowing, weeding, transplanting,
harvesting, winnowing, threshing, picking,
herdsmen, tractor driver, unskilled help,
masonry, etc.
The compensation for the acquired land is
based on the value of the agricultural land,
however price increases have been
ignored. The land value would increase
many times, which the current buyer
would not benefit from. Secondly, if the
prices are left for the market to determine,
the small peasants could never influence
the big corporate tycoons. Also it is mostly
judiciary who has awarded higher
compensation then bureaucracy.
14. 14
Delayed projects
Delayed projects due to mass unrest have
caused a damaging effect to the growth
and development of companies and the
economy as a whole. Earlier states like
Maharashtra, Tamil Nadu, Karnataka,and
Andhra Pradesh had been an attractive
place for investors, but the present day
revolts have shown that land acquisition in
some states pose problems.
Consequences
The consequences of land acquisition in
India are manifold. The empirical and
theoretical studies on displacement
through the acquisition of land by the
15. 15
government for development projects have
so far focused on the direct and immediate
adverse consequences of land acquisition.
Most of the analytical as well as the
descriptive accounts of the immediate
consequences of land acquisition for
development projects draws heavily from
Michael Cernea’s ‘impoverishment risk
model’, which broadly enumerated eight
‘risks’ or ‘dimensions’ of development-
induced displacement. These eight risks
are very much direct and basic in nature
which are
(i) landlessness
(ii) joblessness
(iii) marginalization
(iv) loss of access to common
property resources
(v) increased morbidity and
mortality
(vi) food insecurity
(vii) homelessness
16. 16
(viii)Social disarticulation Recently
L.K. Mahapatra has added ‘loss
of education’ as another
impoverishment risk in
situations of displacement.
But apart from these direct and immediate
effects of land acquisition there are more
subtle and indirect effects of this coercive
and centralized legal procedure, which
have a bearing on various decentralised
and participatory democratic processes,
and institutions of the state power. Land
reforms and the Panchayatiraj institutions
are the two most important areas, which
are being vitiated by land acquisition Of all
the states of India, the consequences and
controversies around land acquisition in
West Bengal has recently gained a lot of
national and international attention. The
peasant resistances against governmental
land expropriation in Singur and
Nandigram has finally led to the fall of the
17. 17
communist party(Marxist) led government
in West Bengal, which ruled the state
through democratic election for 34 years.
The communist led left front government
of West Bengal under the economic
liberalisation policy adopted by the
Central/Union government of the country
shifted from its pro-farmer policy and took
to the capitalist path of industrial
development, which at the micro-levels
endangered the food security of the small
and marginal farmers as well as
sharecroppers who formed the vote bank
of the left front government of West
Bengal The new anti-communist Trinamul
Congress led government of West Bengal
which came to power in the state in 2011
through a massive electoral victory is yet
to develop any comprehensive resettlement
and rehabilitation policy for the thousands
of families affected by various
development projects. The new
government has enacted a law on 14 June
18. 18
2011, in the West Bengal Assembly named
‘Singur Land Rehabilitation and
Development Act, 2011’. With this law,
the West Bengal government has
reacquired about 1000 acres of farmland
from the Tatas which wasgiven to the
company for building a small-car
manufacturing factory in 2006 by the then
Left Front government. The Trinamul
government’s intention was to return 400
acres of farmland to the ‘unwilling’
farmers around whom the agitation against
the Left Front government was organised
by the Trinamul Congress party. However,
now the whole issue seems to have fallen
into a long legal battle between the present
state government and the Tatas, as the
latter has challenged the ‘Singur Land
Rehabilitation and Development Act’ in
the court. As a result, the Trinamul
government has not yet been able to return
the land to those ‘unwilling farmers’ nor
have they received any compensation. In
19. 19
another case of governmental land
acquisition for housing at North 24
Parganas district of West Bengal, the
farmers began to cultivate their farmland
which were acquired but remained
unutilised. According to media report these
farmers were assured by the Trinamul
Congress party leaders before the election
that their land, which is about 1687 acres
would be returned to them if the party
could come to power. However, now these
farmers are turning their backs to the
Trinamul Congress, since the party has not
kept its pre-election promise (The
Statesman, 11 February, 2012).Under the
above disturbing episodes, it may be
worthwhile to narrate the glaring incident
of the opposition levelled by Mamata
Banerjee, the present chief minister of
West Bengal to the draft Land Acquisition
(Amendment) Bill 2007 in the Lok Sabha.
At that time Miss Mamata Banerjee was
the Railway Minister of the Central
20. 20
Government. She opposed to a clause of
the bill which empowered private
companies to acquire up to 70 per cent
land directly from farmers and landowners.
The remaining 30 per cent could be
acquired by the state government. Miss
Banerjee wanted private companies to buy
100 per cent of the land, according to a
report (The Statesman, 26 July 2009). It
seemed that Miss Banerjee would have
allowed the amended Bill to be passed if
the Lok Sabha agreed to modify the 70/30
proportion to 100 per cent purchase by the
companies under the principle of willing-
buyer-willing-seller.
Eminent domain doctrine has been widely
used in India since the era of
Independence, with over 21.6 million
people in the period of 1951-90. They have
been displaced with large-scale projects
like dams, canals, thermal plants,
sanctuaries,industrial facilities, and
21. 21
mining. These occurrences are generally
categorized as "development-induced
displacement".
The process of land acquisition in India
has proven unpopular with the citizenry.
The amount reimbursed is fairly low with
regard to the current index of prices
prevailing in the economy. Furthermore,
due to the low level of human capital of
the displaced people, they often fail to find
adequate employment.
The draft of the government’s National
Policy for Rehabilitation states that a
figure around 75% of the displaced people
since 1951 are still awaiting rehabilitation.
However, it should be noted that
displacement is only being considered with
regard to "Direct Displacement". These
rehabilitation policies do not cover
fishermen, landless laborers, and artisans.
Roughly one in ten Indian tribals is a
displaced person. Dam projects have
22. 22
displaced close to a million Adivasis, with
similar woe for displaced Dalits. Some
estimate suggests 40 percent of displaced
people are of tribal origins.
There have been a rising number of
political and social protests against the
acquisition of land by various
industrialists. They have ranged from
Bengal, Karnataka,and Uttar Pradesh in
the recent past. The acquisition of 997
acres of land by Tata motors in Bengal in
order to set up a factory for the cheapest
car in India was protested .At least a
decade before the Singur episode similar
events occurred in West Bengal, although
the opposition parties and other civil
society organisations remained silent at
that time. Similarly, the Sardar Sarovar
Dam project on the river Narmada was
planned on acquired land, though the
project was later canceled by the World
Bank.
23. 23
The Land Acquisition Act of 1894 allowed
the government to acquire private lands. It
is the only legislation pertaining to land
acquisition which, though amended several
times, has failed to serve its purpose.
Under the 1894 Act, displaced people were
only liable for monetary compensation
linked with market value of the land in
question, which was still quite minimal
considering circle rates are often
misleading.
Land acquisition related conflicts during
the post-reform period in India has shown
three distinctive tendencies;
(1) Technocracy and Bundle of Rights
(2) Power-land Regulation Nexus
(3) Disappearing Commons.
Proposed Amendments
24. 24
The current Narendra Modi lead National
Democratic Alliance (India) government
driven Land Acquisition Amendment Bill
in the Lok Sabha on 10 March 2015 has
seen a tough resistance from key position
parties in India who have called the
proposed amendments "anti farmer" and
"anti poor". The proposed amendments
remove requirements for approval from
farmers to proceed with land acquisition
under five broad categories of projects.
While the bill was passed in Lok Sabha, it
still needs approval from the Rajya Sabha,
where the current government does not
have a majority, for the proposed
amendments to become effective.
The following are the main "disputation
points"
The Right to Fair Compensation and
Transparency in Land Acquisition,
Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act,
2013 defines ‘consent’ clause as "land
25. 25
can only be acquired with approval of
the 70% of the land owners for PPP
projects and 80% for the private
entities. But the proposed amendments
by the Narendra Modi government does
away with consent clause for Industrial
corridors, Public Private Partnership
projects, Rural Infrastructure,
Affordable housing and defense
projects.
The Right to Fair Compensation and
Transparency in Land Acquisition,
Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act,
2013 says the land unutilized for 5
years should be returned to the owner,
but the amendment proposed by NDA
government intends to change to 5
years or any period specified at the
time of setting up the project.
While the The Right to Fair
Compensation and Transparency in
Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and
Resettlement Act, 2013 allows private
26. 26
companies to acquire land but the
proposed amendment allows any
private entity to acquire land.
According to the new amendment if
any government official conducts any
wrongdoing he or she cannot be
prosecuted without prior sanction from
the government.
The Right to Fair Compensation and
Transparency in Land Acquisition,
Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act,
2013 mandated the social assessment
before land acquisition but the NDA
government’s proposed bill does away
with this requirement.
The National Democratic Alliance (India)
government came under heavy attacks
from opposition parties and farmer
organization for the proposed Land
Acquisition bill amendments. The
opponents of the Land acquisition bill
claim the bill to be "anti-farmer" and "pro
27. 27
corporate". They claim that the
amendments are aimed at "benefiting the
large corporate houses".
The opposition Indian National Congress
has opposed the bill in and out of
Parliament. Sonia Gandhi, the chairperson
of UPA and Indian National Congress,
called the bill "anti-poor" and "anti-
farmer". She alleged that the bill will
"break the backbone of India".
Samajwadi party leader Mulayam Singh
Yadav said the Modi government is
"taking anti-farmer stand" and is "favoring
industrialists".
Not only the opposition parties but also
other organization that traditionally
supported Bharatiya Janta Party such as
Mazdoor Sangh, Bhartiya Kisan Sangh and
Akhil Bhartiya Vanvasi Kalyan Ashram
have come heavily against the amendments
proposed by the Narendra Modi lead NDA
28. 28
government. As per the Bharatiya Kisan
Sangh, the Modi government’s land
ordinance tweaks the fundamentals of the
The Right to Fair Compensation and
Transparency in Land Acquisition,
Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013
passed by the UPA government and
supported by the BJP two years ago.
Conclusion
A large number of suggestions from
individual maintained that the farmer
are not against land acquisition per say
but wanted some more changes in
amendments.
29. 29
The governments and the party need to
effectively communicate the need for
amendments with the public.
Necessary to bring changes in the act,
while safeguarding the interest of the
farmers and affected families in cases
of land acquisition.
Procedural difficulties in SIA and
consent were to be mitigated.
To bring more activities under the
preview of exemption of consent.
