Land Acquisition Story

by Praveen.R (1403019)

Introduction

The Special Economic Zone (SEZ) bill was passed in Lok Sabha and Raja Sabha within 2days in

May 2005 with little discussion or dissent. Within two years of the enactment of the bill, a

tenacious resistance was raised by the peasants and citizen group forcing central and state

governments to respond to reversals, negotiations, and deferrals. As the resistance to medium

and large SEZ unfolded across country during 2007 and 2010, the message from the farmers

was that they cannot give their land which was one of the stumbling blocks for building SEZ.

Environment conservative NGO’s like Greenpeace were actively involved in spreading

awareness among citizens on most critical worldwide environmental issues such as oceans and

ancient forests protection, fossil fuel phase out and the promotion of renewable energies to

stop climate change, Nuclear disarmament and an end to nuclear contamination, Elimination of

toxic chemicals and Preventing the release of genetically engineered organisms into nature. The

Government of India on April 09th 2015, suspended Greenpeace India's Foreign Currency

Regulation Act registration under which it receives funds from abroad, the reason behind this

revocation could be to suppress the resistance by Greenpeace against the government to pass

the 2015 bill. According to CAG report in 2014 notes that the number approved SEZ has

reduced from 584 (2011 estimate) to 491 (2014 estimate). Without the sate acquiring common

and private properties there can be no large private, public projects or SEZ this contradicts the

vision 2020 laid by Ex-President Dr. APJ Abdul Kalam.

Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition,

Resettlement and Rehabilitation (Amendment) Act (RFTLRRA), 2013

What was the need to amend the 2013 law and what is the effect of these amendments?

The Land Acquisition Act of 1894 which was imposed in India since the time of British rule.

Under this Act, the government could acquire any land as it wishes to, in the name of "public

purpose". The British had never defined the words "public purpose" in a straightforward

manner, which meant that in theory as well as in practice, a government could acquire land for

any purpose they wanted, and term their purpose "public purpose".

After independence, this practice continued whereby Indian governments, both at the central

and at the state level, acquired large amounts of land for various kinds of development and

infrastructure projects, such as roads, highways, ports (air and sea), power projects (thermal,

hydro and nuclear) etc. During 1947 till 1991, most of these acquisitions had been done by

agencies or units in the public sector. After 1991, when liberalization had taken place, most of

the land acquisition was done by the government to provide land for the private sector, either

for private sector projects (infrastructure projects like power, roads etc.) but also for housing

projects.

There were many issues raised against such land acquisition post 1991:

a) No one, be it the land owners whose land was acquired (mostly farmers), nor those who may

not have owned the land but whose occupations were dependent on the land acquired (mostly

agricultural laborers), were compensated monetarily or otherwise as per this Act. No attempt

was made for the rehabilitation or resettlement of those who had been affected by such land

acquisition either.

b) There was no requirement of any prior consent of the affected parties (those who will lose

their land and/or their occupation or be affected by the pollution or environmental impacts of

these infrastructure projects in future as they live nearby) for constructing any of these

projects.

c) Also, land could be acquired with just a notice by the Collector within a very short time frame

where people who would be affected neither had a chance necessarily to challenge the

acquisition legally, nor had a chance to find some alternate occupation or arrangements for

their own. The government could acquire land in a manner it thinks fit.

d) Most of the land was acquired in the name of India's development, but the local people

found very little stake or benefits in the project. Not only were they not given much

compensation or rehabilitated, they also did not get employment opportunities (which in many

cases were promised to them) in the name of development of the area. In many cases,

educated people from outside were able to get these jobs, while the local people did not get

any kind of benefit. Once liberalization came in, companies which used to spend on health and

education in the name of Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) outside the areas affected by

their projects, were not willing to spend on health and education of those affected by their own

projects the same money. Many of them refused to take consideration of the externalities like

pollution imposed by their own projects, while the local people also did not receive any training

in many cases to be fit to be employed in these development projects as well, either by the

government or the project-owner (be it private or public).

And it is in this context that the Land Acquisition Act (2011) was introduced, and finally passed

yesterday in the Lok Sabha on 29th August 2013. Historically the power to acquire the land is a

sovereign power endowed with the state (Govt). The state needs land for any form of

development. Land is required for housing, townships, urbanization, sub-urbanisation,

industrialization, infrastructure, both urban and rural, irrigation and defense of India. A larger

public interest always prevails over private interest. However, the land owner who loses the

land has to be more than adequately compensated. A highly complicated process of acquisition

which renders it difficult or almost impossible to acquire land can hurt India’s development.

When the 1894 law is amended in the 21st century, it must provide for a 21st century

compensation and cater to the developmental needs of the 21st century. It cannot completely

ignore the developmental needs of the society and mandate that India does not grow.

Highlights of RFTLRRA, 2013:

Both Land Acquisition and Rehabilitation and Rehabilitation and Resettlement will apply when:

1. Government acquires land for its own use, hold and control

2. Government acquires land with the ultimate purpose to transfer it for the use of private companies

for stated public purpose

3. Government acquires land for Public Private Partnership Projects (PPP)

Restrictions and codes RFTLRRA, 2013:

I. Public purpose - points 2. & 3 above, mentioned highlights once stated, cannot be changed

2. Land Acquisition – Point 2 in above mentioned highlights can take place provided that the consent of

80% of the affected families is obtained.

3. Land Acquisition – Point 3 in above mentioned highlights can take place provided consent of 70 % of

affected families is obtained.

4. Return of acquired land if unutilized after a period of five years, but the details on the mechanism of such

return would be informed by the respective government.

5. Acquisition of irrigated multi-cropped land is prohibited but for exceptional circumstances.

Process flow for land acquisition

The land possession is possible only after paying the full compensation, the maximum time

for which is three months for the compensation and six months for monetary R&R, from date of

award. The non-monetary R&R has to be done within a period of eighteen months from the date of

award, however the implementation of the same which includes various infrastructure related facilities

will be a herculean task. In agreement with the Standing Committee recommendations, the Bill

incorporates penal rates of 9% per annum of unpaid sums in case of a delay of less than a year and

15% per annum in case of delays of more than an year to be paid by the Collector.

Proposed amendments to Right to Fair Compensation and

Transparency in Land Acquisition, Resettlement and Rehabilitation

(Amendment) Act, 2013:

During the 2015 pre-Budget session of the Parliament on 24th February 2015, the government

introduced the controversial Land Acquisition Amendment Bill in the Lok Sabha amid strident

protest by almost all opposition parties in India.

1- The Section 10(A) of the Act , 2013 had a consent clause for acquiring land – industrial

corridors, Public Private Partnership projects, rural infrastructure, affordable housing and

defence. But after the current central government changed, it exempted these five categories

from the rule of acquitting land in the Bill tabled on February 24. So if govt requires the land

with respect to national security, defense, rural infrastructure including electrification,

industrial corridors and housing for the poor.

2- Social assessment which was mandatory before acquitting land has also been exempted in

the Bill tabled in the Lok Sabha. This means the government or private individuals/companies

will no longer need mandatory 80% consent for land acquisition for the above mentioned five

sectors

3- As per the existing law, land will be given back to the farmer if it remains unused for five

years. The proposed amendment says the land will be returned only if the specified project on

the land fails to complete the deadline.

4- Bureaucrats will be punished if found guilty of violating any clause of the existing Land Act.

However, the new clause makes government sanction necessary to prosecute civil servants.

Compared to the RFTLRRA, 2013 the 2015 amendment balances the developmental needs of

India, while still providing enhanced compensation to the land owners. The ruling Modi

government has planned for creation of smart cities, townships, industrial corridors, business

centers, defense projects, cantonments, ports, nuclear installations, building of highways,

irrigation projects, dams have a long gestations period which realistically cannot be completed

within in five years. This could be one of the reason the previous congress government was not

able to bring in smart cities, mega projects as said earlier in the introduction there was a

reduction in the number of approved SEZ. The draft provisions of the 2013 Act enthusiastically

provide that no part of an acquired land could be used for a private educational institution or a

hospital. If was the case how will new smart cities and townships come up? Will they only have

a civil hospital and a Government school/ college and no other healthcare and educational

institutions will be allowed to be established there? The ordinance permits hospitals and

educational institutions to be established on an acquired land. That is the purpose of

acquisition for townships to build SEZ, organizations to create mega projects. A township

without a social infrastructure would be inherently incomplete.

Conclusion

The needs of a modern growing and developing India need a balanced approach. Development

and justice to the land owner must coexist. One cannot be done at the cost of the other. The

amendment ordinance is based on extensive consultations where State Government of most

political parties supported these changes. Those who are opposed to it can certainly mandate

their party’s State Governments not to use the provisions of the ordinance. History will judge

how these States will lose out in the era of competitive federalism.