Events & Issues

New Delhi

9 May 2011

Land Acquisition

DON’T DEPRIVE FARMERS

By Dhurjati Mukherjee

 Land acquisition has become a volatile and contentious issue with farmers opposing it, which they believe favours the rich and powerful. Indeed, not only have the on-going protests in Greater Noida, Agra and Aligarh in UP turned violent, killing both farmers and policemen but demonstrations have taken place, from time to time, in various other parts of the country. Namely, over the use of force in taking over land for setting up of industries and/or for “pubic purposes”.

Importantly, the whole gamut of land acquisition clearly reveals that poor farmers, tribals and others have been forced to not only give up their land but also the money offered has been below market rates and  insufficient to compensate their loss. Be it UP, Orissa, Karnataka, Tamil Nadu or West Bengal there have been serious problems in acquiring land for building roads, steel plant, airport or nuclear power plant.

Recall, way back in the 1930’s Mahatma Gandhi in a reference to the Tata’s had warned: “The disposed never got the exact equivalent of the land taken.  What is the value of all the boons that the Tata scheme claims to confer upon India if it is to be at the expense of even one poor man? I suggest to the custodians of the great name that they would more truly advance India’s interest if they will defer to the wishes of their weak and helpless countrymen”.

It is in this context that the Land Acquisition Amendment Bill gains credence and how far it would ensure proper rehabilitation of the dis-possessed. Following violent protests against the UP Government’s liberal land policy for facilitating the Yamuna Expressway, the Union Rural Development Ministry is now thinking of adding ‘annuity’ to the pending Resettlement and Rehabilitation (R&R) Bill. Whereby, the farmers would get fixed amount annuity periodically after their land is acquired. This would be in addition to the compensation that they got for their land.

Pertinently, annuity per se is expected to sweeten the compensation in the R & R Bill and serve as a guideline on an “acceptance package”, non-binding on States. However, with UP and Haryana giving “good compensation with annuity” in their R & R policies, the Centre would be forced to adopt this.

The proposal comes in the wake of a serious debate over the suggestions made in the draft. The earlier Aligarh face-off between farmers saw the Opposition argue that the Centre’s failure to make necessary amendments was responsible for states like UP acquiring land with impunity for private players. One cannot absolve the Government of its responsibility as nothing had been done over the past few years with the clamour against land acquisition rising.

Recently, the Prime Minister assured a delegation led by Rahul Gandhi that the Bill would be brought soon as it finalization was taken time due to lack of agreement on many contentious issues. Said he, “We cannot allow the transfer of land from the poor to the rich without giving the benefits to the poor”.  

Significantly, the State’s role in acquisition could be further reduced from 30 per cent as given in the Land Acquisition Amendment Bill to 10 per cent to win over the Trinamool Congress Chief, Mamata Banerjee. Meanwhile, the Trinamool Congress has submitted a proposal wherein it has called for scrapping the old Act altogether. It is totally opposed to State Governments acquiring land on behalf of private companies. Notably, it has underscored that the Government does not act for private players and there should be clear definition of “public purpose” in the acquisition law.

The Party has also pointed out that before any project starts, the social and environment impact studies should be completed and the acquisition process must not begin without the concerned villagers’ consent. Given that the old Act has no provision for obtaining the landowners’ consent for acquiring land “for any public purpose”.

Moreover, Section 5A of the Act only allows landowners to file objections, if any, within 30 days from the date of publication of notice under Section 4. The objections would be heard but “the decision of the Government shall be final”. In fact, Mamata had stood her ground in Singur and Nandigram against acquisition for the Tata small car project. Her plea: Land could be acquired only for any “public purpose”.  She has also demanded the compensation and rehabilitation package be settled before the acquisition process starts.

Another aspect of the problem which needs examination is whether agricultural land, which yields two crops per year, should be acquired. The case for such a takeover should be outlined and not done just to satisfy private players for setting up industries. Thus, it is necessary to draw up a national plan with regard to conversion of agricultural land for industrial purposes, keeping in mind the rehabilitation aspect and also the future source of livelihood of the displaced and their families.

Undoubtedly, if proper steps are not taken, the resultant effect in the not-too-distant future would be large-scale displacement and migration to urban centres in search of employment and livelihood which, in turn, would increase social chaos and tension in society.

In the circumstances, it is imperative that the amendment to the Land Acquisition Act be worked out in such a manner that the poor and tribals remain unaffected. Against the backdrop of various surveys which found that most of those whose land had been acquired landed in utter distress and not a few perished in hunger and poverty.

Hence, it is vital that livelihood security should be the prime consideration in evolving a viable rehabilitation package for farmers so that the loss of land is compensated in such a way that the disposed are nor affected and can find a new lease of life.

Clearly, land is a very vital asset, specially in a country like India where population growth along-with population density is very high. Its judicious use is necessary keeping in mind the interests of BPL families and the economically weaker sections, which constitute over 45 per cent of the population. Consequently, the issue of land acquisition and rehabilitation needs to be examined by a panel of eminent experts comprising economists, planners, legal experts, sociologists’ et al before arriving at a judicious decision. ------ INFA   

(Copyright, India News and Feature Alliance)