Deprecated (16384): The ArrayAccess methods will be removed in 4.0.0.Use getParam(), getData() and getQuery() instead. - /home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php, line: 73
 You can disable deprecation warnings by setting `Error.errorLevel` to `E_ALL & ~E_USER_DEPRECATED` in your config/app.php. [CORE/src/Core/functions.php, line 311]
Code Context


        trigger_error($message, E_USER_DEPRECATED);

    }
$message = 'The ArrayAccess methods will be removed in 4.0.0.Use getParam(), getData() and getQuery() instead. - /home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php, line: 73
 You can disable deprecation warnings by setting `Error.errorLevel` to `E_ALL & ~E_USER_DEPRECATED` in your config/app.php.'
$stackFrame = (int) 1
$trace = [
	(int) 0 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/ServerRequest.php',
		'line' => (int) 2421,
		'function' => 'deprecationWarning',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => 'The ArrayAccess methods will be removed in 4.0.0.Use getParam(), getData() and getQuery() instead.'
		]
	],
	(int) 1 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php',
		'line' => (int) 73,
		'function' => 'offsetGet',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\ServerRequest',
		'object' => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => 'catslug'
		]
	],
	(int) 2 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Controller/Controller.php',
		'line' => (int) 610,
		'function' => 'printArticle',
		'class' => 'App\Controller\ArtileDetailController',
		'object' => object(App\Controller\ArtileDetailController) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => []
	],
	(int) 3 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php',
		'line' => (int) 120,
		'function' => 'invokeAction',
		'class' => 'Cake\Controller\Controller',
		'object' => object(App\Controller\ArtileDetailController) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => []
	],
	(int) 4 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php',
		'line' => (int) 94,
		'function' => '_invoke',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher',
		'object' => object(Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(App\Controller\ArtileDetailController) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 5 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/BaseApplication.php',
		'line' => (int) 235,
		'function' => 'dispatch',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher',
		'object' => object(Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 6 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Runner.php',
		'line' => (int) 65,
		'function' => '__invoke',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\BaseApplication',
		'object' => object(App\Application) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {},
			(int) 2 => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 7 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Routing/Middleware/RoutingMiddleware.php',
		'line' => (int) 162,
		'function' => '__invoke',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\Runner',
		'object' => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 8 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Runner.php',
		'line' => (int) 65,
		'function' => '__invoke',
		'class' => 'Cake\Routing\Middleware\RoutingMiddleware',
		'object' => object(Cake\Routing\Middleware\RoutingMiddleware) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {},
			(int) 2 => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 9 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Routing/Middleware/AssetMiddleware.php',
		'line' => (int) 88,
		'function' => '__invoke',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\Runner',
		'object' => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 10 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Runner.php',
		'line' => (int) 65,
		'function' => '__invoke',
		'class' => 'Cake\Routing\Middleware\AssetMiddleware',
		'object' => object(Cake\Routing\Middleware\AssetMiddleware) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {},
			(int) 2 => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 11 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Error/Middleware/ErrorHandlerMiddleware.php',
		'line' => (int) 96,
		'function' => '__invoke',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\Runner',
		'object' => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 12 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Runner.php',
		'line' => (int) 65,
		'function' => '__invoke',
		'class' => 'Cake\Error\Middleware\ErrorHandlerMiddleware',
		'object' => object(Cake\Error\Middleware\ErrorHandlerMiddleware) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {},
			(int) 2 => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 13 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Runner.php',
		'line' => (int) 51,
		'function' => '__invoke',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\Runner',
		'object' => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 14 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Server.php',
		'line' => (int) 98,
		'function' => 'run',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\Runner',
		'object' => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\MiddlewareQueue) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 2 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 15 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/webroot/index.php',
		'line' => (int) 39,
		'function' => 'run',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\Server',
		'object' => object(Cake\Http\Server) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => []
	]
]
$frame = [
	'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php',
	'line' => (int) 73,
	'function' => 'offsetGet',
	'class' => 'Cake\Http\ServerRequest',
	'object' => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {
		trustProxy => false
		[protected] params => [
			[maximum depth reached]
		]
		[protected] data => [[maximum depth reached]]
		[protected] query => [[maximum depth reached]]
		[protected] cookies => [[maximum depth reached]]
		[protected] _environment => [
			[maximum depth reached]
		]
		[protected] url => 'latest-news-updates/govt-could-compromise-on-land-bill-2015-aditi-phadnis-4676850/print'
		[protected] base => ''
		[protected] webroot => '/'
		[protected] here => '/latest-news-updates/govt-could-compromise-on-land-bill-2015-aditi-phadnis-4676850/print'
		[protected] trustedProxies => [[maximum depth reached]]
		[protected] _input => null
		[protected] _detectors => [
			[maximum depth reached]
		]
		[protected] _detectorCache => [
			[maximum depth reached]
		]
		[protected] stream => object(Zend\Diactoros\PhpInputStream) {}
		[protected] uri => object(Zend\Diactoros\Uri) {}
		[protected] session => object(Cake\Http\Session) {}
		[protected] attributes => [[maximum depth reached]]
		[protected] emulatedAttributes => [
			[maximum depth reached]
		]
		[protected] uploadedFiles => [[maximum depth reached]]
		[protected] protocol => null
		[protected] requestTarget => null
		[private] deprecatedProperties => [
			[maximum depth reached]
		]
	},
	'type' => '->',
	'args' => [
		(int) 0 => 'catslug'
	]
]
deprecationWarning - CORE/src/Core/functions.php, line 311
Cake\Http\ServerRequest::offsetGet() - CORE/src/Http/ServerRequest.php, line 2421
App\Controller\ArtileDetailController::printArticle() - APP/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php, line 73
Cake\Controller\Controller::invokeAction() - CORE/src/Controller/Controller.php, line 610
Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::_invoke() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 120
Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::dispatch() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 94
Cake\Http\BaseApplication::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/BaseApplication.php, line 235
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Routing\Middleware\RoutingMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/RoutingMiddleware.php, line 162
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Routing\Middleware\AssetMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/AssetMiddleware.php, line 88
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Error\Middleware\ErrorHandlerMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Error/Middleware/ErrorHandlerMiddleware.php, line 96
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Http\Runner::run() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 51
Cake\Http\Server::run() - CORE/src/Http/Server.php, line 98

Deprecated (16384): The ArrayAccess methods will be removed in 4.0.0.Use getParam(), getData() and getQuery() instead. - /home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php, line: 74
 You can disable deprecation warnings by setting `Error.errorLevel` to `E_ALL & ~E_USER_DEPRECATED` in your config/app.php. [CORE/src/Core/functions.php, line 311]
Code Context


        trigger_error($message, E_USER_DEPRECATED);

    }
$message = 'The ArrayAccess methods will be removed in 4.0.0.Use getParam(), getData() and getQuery() instead. - /home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php, line: 74
 You can disable deprecation warnings by setting `Error.errorLevel` to `E_ALL & ~E_USER_DEPRECATED` in your config/app.php.'
$stackFrame = (int) 1
$trace = [
	(int) 0 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/ServerRequest.php',
		'line' => (int) 2421,
		'function' => 'deprecationWarning',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => 'The ArrayAccess methods will be removed in 4.0.0.Use getParam(), getData() and getQuery() instead.'
		]
	],
	(int) 1 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php',
		'line' => (int) 74,
		'function' => 'offsetGet',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\ServerRequest',
		'object' => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => 'artileslug'
		]
	],
	(int) 2 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Controller/Controller.php',
		'line' => (int) 610,
		'function' => 'printArticle',
		'class' => 'App\Controller\ArtileDetailController',
		'object' => object(App\Controller\ArtileDetailController) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => []
	],
	(int) 3 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php',
		'line' => (int) 120,
		'function' => 'invokeAction',
		'class' => 'Cake\Controller\Controller',
		'object' => object(App\Controller\ArtileDetailController) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => []
	],
	(int) 4 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php',
		'line' => (int) 94,
		'function' => '_invoke',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher',
		'object' => object(Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(App\Controller\ArtileDetailController) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 5 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/BaseApplication.php',
		'line' => (int) 235,
		'function' => 'dispatch',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher',
		'object' => object(Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 6 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Runner.php',
		'line' => (int) 65,
		'function' => '__invoke',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\BaseApplication',
		'object' => object(App\Application) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {},
			(int) 2 => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 7 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Routing/Middleware/RoutingMiddleware.php',
		'line' => (int) 162,
		'function' => '__invoke',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\Runner',
		'object' => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 8 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Runner.php',
		'line' => (int) 65,
		'function' => '__invoke',
		'class' => 'Cake\Routing\Middleware\RoutingMiddleware',
		'object' => object(Cake\Routing\Middleware\RoutingMiddleware) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {},
			(int) 2 => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 9 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Routing/Middleware/AssetMiddleware.php',
		'line' => (int) 88,
		'function' => '__invoke',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\Runner',
		'object' => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 10 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Runner.php',
		'line' => (int) 65,
		'function' => '__invoke',
		'class' => 'Cake\Routing\Middleware\AssetMiddleware',
		'object' => object(Cake\Routing\Middleware\AssetMiddleware) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {},
			(int) 2 => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 11 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Error/Middleware/ErrorHandlerMiddleware.php',
		'line' => (int) 96,
		'function' => '__invoke',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\Runner',
		'object' => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 12 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Runner.php',
		'line' => (int) 65,
		'function' => '__invoke',
		'class' => 'Cake\Error\Middleware\ErrorHandlerMiddleware',
		'object' => object(Cake\Error\Middleware\ErrorHandlerMiddleware) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {},
			(int) 2 => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 13 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Runner.php',
		'line' => (int) 51,
		'function' => '__invoke',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\Runner',
		'object' => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 14 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Server.php',
		'line' => (int) 98,
		'function' => 'run',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\Runner',
		'object' => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\MiddlewareQueue) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 2 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 15 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/webroot/index.php',
		'line' => (int) 39,
		'function' => 'run',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\Server',
		'object' => object(Cake\Http\Server) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => []
	]
]
$frame = [
	'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php',
	'line' => (int) 74,
	'function' => 'offsetGet',
	'class' => 'Cake\Http\ServerRequest',
	'object' => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {
		trustProxy => false
		[protected] params => [
			[maximum depth reached]
		]
		[protected] data => [[maximum depth reached]]
		[protected] query => [[maximum depth reached]]
		[protected] cookies => [[maximum depth reached]]
		[protected] _environment => [
			[maximum depth reached]
		]
		[protected] url => 'latest-news-updates/govt-could-compromise-on-land-bill-2015-aditi-phadnis-4676850/print'
		[protected] base => ''
		[protected] webroot => '/'
		[protected] here => '/latest-news-updates/govt-could-compromise-on-land-bill-2015-aditi-phadnis-4676850/print'
		[protected] trustedProxies => [[maximum depth reached]]
		[protected] _input => null
		[protected] _detectors => [
			[maximum depth reached]
		]
		[protected] _detectorCache => [
			[maximum depth reached]
		]
		[protected] stream => object(Zend\Diactoros\PhpInputStream) {}
		[protected] uri => object(Zend\Diactoros\Uri) {}
		[protected] session => object(Cake\Http\Session) {}
		[protected] attributes => [[maximum depth reached]]
		[protected] emulatedAttributes => [
			[maximum depth reached]
		]
		[protected] uploadedFiles => [[maximum depth reached]]
		[protected] protocol => null
		[protected] requestTarget => null
		[private] deprecatedProperties => [
			[maximum depth reached]
		]
	},
	'type' => '->',
	'args' => [
		(int) 0 => 'artileslug'
	]
]
deprecationWarning - CORE/src/Core/functions.php, line 311
Cake\Http\ServerRequest::offsetGet() - CORE/src/Http/ServerRequest.php, line 2421
App\Controller\ArtileDetailController::printArticle() - APP/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php, line 74
Cake\Controller\Controller::invokeAction() - CORE/src/Controller/Controller.php, line 610
Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::_invoke() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 120
Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::dispatch() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 94
Cake\Http\BaseApplication::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/BaseApplication.php, line 235
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Routing\Middleware\RoutingMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/RoutingMiddleware.php, line 162
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Routing\Middleware\AssetMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/AssetMiddleware.php, line 88
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Error\Middleware\ErrorHandlerMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Error/Middleware/ErrorHandlerMiddleware.php, line 96
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Http\Runner::run() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 51
Cake\Http\Server::run() - CORE/src/Http/Server.php, line 98

Warning (512): Unable to emit headers. Headers sent in file=/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Error/Debugger.php line=853 [CORE/src/Http/ResponseEmitter.php, line 48]
Code Context
            if (Configure::read('debug')) {

                trigger_error($message, E_USER_WARNING);

            } else {
$response = object(Cake\Http\Response) {

	'status' => (int) 200,
	'contentType' => 'text/html',
	'headers' => [
		'Content-Type' => [
			[maximum depth reached]
		]
	],
	'file' => null,
	'fileRange' => [],
	'cookies' => object(Cake\Http\Cookie\CookieCollection) {},
	'cacheDirectives' => [],
	'body' => '<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Transitional//EN"
        "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-transitional.dtd">
<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">
<head>
    <link rel="canonical" href="https://im4change.in/<pre class="cake-error"><a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="document.getElementById('cakeErr67fffc4897f3c-trace').style.display = (document.getElementById('cakeErr67fffc4897f3c-trace').style.display == 'none' ? '' : 'none');"><b>Notice</b> (8)</a>: Undefined variable: urlPrefix [<b>APP/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp</b>, line <b>8</b>]<div id="cakeErr67fffc4897f3c-trace" class="cake-stack-trace" style="display: none;"><a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="document.getElementById('cakeErr67fffc4897f3c-code').style.display = (document.getElementById('cakeErr67fffc4897f3c-code').style.display == 'none' ? '' : 'none')">Code</a> <a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="document.getElementById('cakeErr67fffc4897f3c-context').style.display = (document.getElementById('cakeErr67fffc4897f3c-context').style.display == 'none' ? '' : 'none')">Context</a><pre id="cakeErr67fffc4897f3c-code" class="cake-code-dump" style="display: none;"><code><span style="color: #000000"><span style="color: #0000BB"></span><span style="color: #007700">&lt;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">head</span><span style="color: #007700">&gt;
</span></span></code>
<span class="code-highlight"><code><span style="color: #000000">&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&lt;link&nbsp;rel="canonical"&nbsp;href="<span style="color: #0000BB">&lt;?php&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #007700">echo&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">Configure</span><span style="color: #007700">::</span><span style="color: #0000BB">read</span><span style="color: #007700">(</span><span style="color: #DD0000">'SITE_URL'</span><span style="color: #007700">);&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">?&gt;&lt;?php&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #007700">echo&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">$urlPrefix</span><span style="color: #007700">;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">?&gt;&lt;?php&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #007700">echo&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">$article_current</span><span style="color: #007700">-&gt;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">category</span><span style="color: #007700">-&gt;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">slug</span><span style="color: #007700">;&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">?&gt;</span>/<span style="color: #0000BB">&lt;?php&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #007700">echo&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">$article_current</span><span style="color: #007700">-&gt;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">seo_url</span><span style="color: #007700">;&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">?&gt;</span>.html"/&gt;
</span></code></span>
<code><span style="color: #000000"><span style="color: #0000BB">&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #007700">&lt;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">meta&nbsp;http</span><span style="color: #007700">-</span><span style="color: #0000BB">equiv</span><span style="color: #007700">=</span><span style="color: #DD0000">"Content-Type"&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">content</span><span style="color: #007700">=</span><span style="color: #DD0000">"text/html;&nbsp;charset=utf-8"</span><span style="color: #007700">/&gt;
</span></span></code></pre><pre id="cakeErr67fffc4897f3c-context" class="cake-context" style="display: none;">$viewFile = &#039;/home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp&#039;
$dataForView = [
	&#039;article_current&#039; =&gt; object(App\Model\Entity\Article) {

		&#039;id&#039; =&gt; (int) 28797,
		&#039;title&#039; =&gt; &#039;Govt could compromise on Land Bill 2015 -Aditi Phadnis&#039;,
		&#039;subheading&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
		&#039;description&#039; =&gt; &#039;&lt;div align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;
-Business Standard&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;em&gt;Even amended version passed by Lok Sabha could be diluted&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;/em&gt;&lt;br /&gt;
Reconciled to the fact that it will have no option but to cave in to the diktat of the opposition on the 2015 Land Acquisition Resettlement and Rehabilitation (LARR) Bill in the Rajya Sabha where it is in a minority, the Narendra Modi-led National Democratic Alliance (NDA) government is preparing to virtually abandon its own bill.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
This could cause even more legislative and policy confusion on land acquisition.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The 2013 LARR was amended and replaced by LARR 2015, to make land acquisition easier for certain categories of projects, to give a boost to industrial activity. The requirement of Social Impact Analysis (SIA) and consent of land losers was waived for this category. Lok Sabha passed LARR 2015 and 44 MPs of the Congress walked out to show they disagreed with the amendments.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
When the Bill came to the Rajya Sabha, it demanded a parliamentary panel to study the bill as even its amended version had been changed substantially by the Lok Sabha. The committee which has 15 BJP members and 15 from other parties, and is headed by MP from Darjeeling, S S Ahluwalia, is likely to give its report on 5 August. Clause-by-clause discussion will begin from Monday.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
According to sources in the committee, most BJP MPs are inexperienced and unschooled about the finer points of law. The proceedings are dominated by former Rural Development Minister and architect of the 2013 law, Jairam Ramesh and former Madhya Pradesh Chief Minister, Digvijay Singh, assisted ably by Trinamool Congress leader Kalyan Bannerjee. The balance of advantage is with the opposition and the BJP MPs are intellectually unable to hold their own.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The net result is substantial dilution of the LARR 2015 &amp;ndash; even the amended version passed by the Lok Sabha.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The opposition in the Select Committee, for instance is united that acquired land which is not utilized for three years should be returned to land losers. In the 2015 bill as passed by the Lok Sabha, this period was &amp;ldquo;a period specified for setting up the project or five years, whichever was later&amp;rdquo; (clause 101).&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Some doubts were raised about the word &amp;lsquo;utilization&amp;rsquo; &amp;ndash; should land be deemed to have been utilized if a boundary wall is built? This matter is still under discussion.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Section 46 of LARR 2015 related to extending rehabilitation and resettlement benefits to land owners in case of purchase of land through private negotiations in excess of 100 acres. The government is ready to scrap this.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Industry Secretary Amitabh Kant who recently deposed before the committee said that the most contentious issue &amp;ndash; land required for industrial corridors upto 1 km on either side of the road - should be exempt from SIA and Consent clauses as the land (mostly) belonged to Indian Railways any way. He said this should never have been in the LARR legislation in the first place.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The government might relent and take Industrial corridors out of the purview of the bill.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
In the end however, the general fear is that given the opposition majority in the Rajya Sabha, the LARR bill passed by the upper house may be a deeply diluted version of the government&amp;rsquo;s own 2015 bill. This will leave the government with only two choices &amp;ndash; get the Lok Sabha to ratify the bill as amended by the Rajya Sabha that will be marginally different from the 2013 bill widely perceived as anti-industry; or push for the Lok Sabha version of the LARR 2015 to be passed by the upper house, wait for it to fall and then have it passed in a joint sitting of the two Houses.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
There is a third choice: that the government works on breaking the opposition by isolating the Congress. That doesn&amp;rsquo;t seem politically feasible.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
In the interim, in the absence of central guidance, state governments will be free to acquire land in the manner they think fit.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Under the 2013 law, only two big parcels of land have been acquired so far: one for a road in Punjab, built primarily to service a hotel owned by the family of Chief Minister Parkash Singh Badal; and one in Odisha. It was to telescope the time taken in acquiring land that the government had pressed for the 2015 amendments. However, recognising the reality that the NDA does not have majority in the Rajya Sabha, Prime Minister Modi had resolved to let state governments take the final call in the matter and make one last effort to take the opposition on board on an amended version of the 2015 legislation. Now it seems even that might not materialise.
&lt;/div&gt;&#039;,
		&#039;credit_writer&#039; =&gt; &#039;Business Standard, 31 July, 2015, http://www.business-standard.com/article/politics/govt-could-compromise-on-land-bill-2015-115073101352_1.html&#039;,
		&#039;article_img&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
		&#039;article_img_thumb&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
		&#039;status&#039; =&gt; (int) 1,
		&#039;show_on_home&#039; =&gt; (int) 1,
		&#039;lang&#039; =&gt; &#039;EN&#039;,
		&#039;category_id&#039; =&gt; (int) 16,
		&#039;tag_keyword&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
		&#039;seo_url&#039; =&gt; &#039;govt-could-compromise-on-land-bill-2015-aditi-phadnis-4676850&#039;,
		&#039;meta_title&#039; =&gt; null,
		&#039;meta_keywords&#039; =&gt; null,
		&#039;meta_description&#039; =&gt; null,
		&#039;noindex&#039; =&gt; (int) 0,
		&#039;publish_date&#039; =&gt; object(Cake\I18n\FrozenDate) {},
		&#039;most_visit_section_id&#039; =&gt; null,
		&#039;article_big_img&#039; =&gt; null,
		&#039;liveid&#039; =&gt; (int) 4676850,
		&#039;created&#039; =&gt; object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {},
		&#039;modified&#039; =&gt; object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {},
		&#039;edate&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
		&#039;tags&#039; =&gt; [
			[maximum depth reached]
		],
		&#039;category&#039; =&gt; object(App\Model\Entity\Category) {},
		&#039;[new]&#039; =&gt; false,
		&#039;[accessible]&#039; =&gt; [
			[maximum depth reached]
		],
		&#039;[dirty]&#039; =&gt; [[maximum depth reached]],
		&#039;[original]&#039; =&gt; [[maximum depth reached]],
		&#039;[virtual]&#039; =&gt; [[maximum depth reached]],
		&#039;[hasErrors]&#039; =&gt; false,
		&#039;[errors]&#039; =&gt; [[maximum depth reached]],
		&#039;[invalid]&#039; =&gt; [[maximum depth reached]],
		&#039;[repository]&#039; =&gt; &#039;Articles&#039;
	
	},
	&#039;articleid&#039; =&gt; (int) 28797,
	&#039;metaTitle&#039; =&gt; &#039;LATEST NEWS UPDATES | Govt could compromise on Land Bill 2015 -Aditi Phadnis&#039;,
	&#039;metaKeywords&#039; =&gt; &#039;Social Impact Assessment,Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Rehabilitation and Resettlement law,Consent,Land Acquisition,Land Acquisition Act,land acquisition and rehabilitation,Land Acquisition Bill,Land Alienation&#039;,
	&#039;metaDesc&#039; =&gt; &#039;
-Business Standard

Even amended version passed by Lok Sabha could be diluted

Reconciled to the fact that it will have no option but to cave in to the diktat of the opposition on the 2015 Land Acquisition Resettlement and Rehabilitation (LARR) Bill...&#039;,
	&#039;disp&#039; =&gt; &#039;&lt;div align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;-Business Standard&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;em&gt;Even amended version passed by Lok Sabha could be diluted&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/em&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Reconciled to the fact that it will have no option but to cave in to the diktat of the opposition on the 2015 Land Acquisition Resettlement and Rehabilitation (LARR) Bill in the Rajya Sabha where it is in a minority, the Narendra Modi-led National Democratic Alliance (NDA) government is preparing to virtually abandon its own bill.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;This could cause even more legislative and policy confusion on land acquisition.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;The 2013 LARR was amended and replaced by LARR 2015, to make land acquisition easier for certain categories of projects, to give a boost to industrial activity. The requirement of Social Impact Analysis (SIA) and consent of land losers was waived for this category. Lok Sabha passed LARR 2015 and 44 MPs of the Congress walked out to show they disagreed with the amendments.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;When the Bill came to the Rajya Sabha, it demanded a parliamentary panel to study the bill as even its amended version had been changed substantially by the Lok Sabha. The committee which has 15 BJP members and 15 from other parties, and is headed by MP from Darjeeling, S S Ahluwalia, is likely to give its report on 5 August. Clause-by-clause discussion will begin from Monday.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;According to sources in the committee, most BJP MPs are inexperienced and unschooled about the finer points of law. The proceedings are dominated by former Rural Development Minister and architect of the 2013 law, Jairam Ramesh and former Madhya Pradesh Chief Minister, Digvijay Singh, assisted ably by Trinamool Congress leader Kalyan Bannerjee. The balance of advantage is with the opposition and the BJP MPs are intellectually unable to hold their own.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;The net result is substantial dilution of the LARR 2015 &amp;ndash; even the amended version passed by the Lok Sabha.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;The opposition in the Select Committee, for instance is united that acquired land which is not utilized for three years should be returned to land losers. In the 2015 bill as passed by the Lok Sabha, this period was &amp;ldquo;a period specified for setting up the project or five years, whichever was later&amp;rdquo; (clause 101).&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Some doubts were raised about the word &amp;lsquo;utilization&amp;rsquo; &amp;ndash; should land be deemed to have been utilized if a boundary wall is built? This matter is still under discussion.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Section 46 of LARR 2015 related to extending rehabilitation and resettlement benefits to land owners in case of purchase of land through private negotiations in excess of 100 acres. The government is ready to scrap this.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Industry Secretary Amitabh Kant who recently deposed before the committee said that the most contentious issue &amp;ndash; land required for industrial corridors upto 1 km on either side of the road - should be exempt from SIA and Consent clauses as the land (mostly) belonged to Indian Railways any way. He said this should never have been in the LARR legislation in the first place.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;The government might relent and take Industrial corridors out of the purview of the bill.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;In the end however, the general fear is that given the opposition majority in the Rajya Sabha, the LARR bill passed by the upper house may be a deeply diluted version of the government&amp;rsquo;s own 2015 bill. This will leave the government with only two choices &amp;ndash; get the Lok Sabha to ratify the bill as amended by the Rajya Sabha that will be marginally different from the 2013 bill widely perceived as anti-industry; or push for the Lok Sabha version of the LARR 2015 to be passed by the upper house, wait for it to fall and then have it passed in a joint sitting of the two Houses.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;There is a third choice: that the government works on breaking the opposition by isolating the Congress. That doesn&amp;rsquo;t seem politically feasible.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;In the interim, in the absence of central guidance, state governments will be free to acquire land in the manner they think fit.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Under the 2013 law, only two big parcels of land have been acquired so far: one for a road in Punjab, built primarily to service a hotel owned by the family of Chief Minister Parkash Singh Badal; and one in Odisha. It was to telescope the time taken in acquiring land that the government had pressed for the 2015 amendments. However, recognising the reality that the NDA does not have majority in the Rajya Sabha, Prime Minister Modi had resolved to let state governments take the final call in the matter and make one last effort to take the opposition on board on an amended version of the 2015 legislation. Now it seems even that might not materialise.&lt;/div&gt;&#039;,
	&#039;lang&#039; =&gt; &#039;English&#039;,
	&#039;SITE_URL&#039; =&gt; &#039;https://im4change.in/&#039;,
	&#039;site_title&#039; =&gt; &#039;im4change&#039;,
	&#039;adminprix&#039; =&gt; &#039;admin&#039;
]
$article_current = object(App\Model\Entity\Article) {

	&#039;id&#039; =&gt; (int) 28797,
	&#039;title&#039; =&gt; &#039;Govt could compromise on Land Bill 2015 -Aditi Phadnis&#039;,
	&#039;subheading&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
	&#039;description&#039; =&gt; &#039;&lt;div align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;
-Business Standard&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;em&gt;Even amended version passed by Lok Sabha could be diluted&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;/em&gt;&lt;br /&gt;
Reconciled to the fact that it will have no option but to cave in to the diktat of the opposition on the 2015 Land Acquisition Resettlement and Rehabilitation (LARR) Bill in the Rajya Sabha where it is in a minority, the Narendra Modi-led National Democratic Alliance (NDA) government is preparing to virtually abandon its own bill.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
This could cause even more legislative and policy confusion on land acquisition.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The 2013 LARR was amended and replaced by LARR 2015, to make land acquisition easier for certain categories of projects, to give a boost to industrial activity. The requirement of Social Impact Analysis (SIA) and consent of land losers was waived for this category. Lok Sabha passed LARR 2015 and 44 MPs of the Congress walked out to show they disagreed with the amendments.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
When the Bill came to the Rajya Sabha, it demanded a parliamentary panel to study the bill as even its amended version had been changed substantially by the Lok Sabha. The committee which has 15 BJP members and 15 from other parties, and is headed by MP from Darjeeling, S S Ahluwalia, is likely to give its report on 5 August. Clause-by-clause discussion will begin from Monday.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
According to sources in the committee, most BJP MPs are inexperienced and unschooled about the finer points of law. The proceedings are dominated by former Rural Development Minister and architect of the 2013 law, Jairam Ramesh and former Madhya Pradesh Chief Minister, Digvijay Singh, assisted ably by Trinamool Congress leader Kalyan Bannerjee. The balance of advantage is with the opposition and the BJP MPs are intellectually unable to hold their own.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The net result is substantial dilution of the LARR 2015 &amp;ndash; even the amended version passed by the Lok Sabha.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The opposition in the Select Committee, for instance is united that acquired land which is not utilized for three years should be returned to land losers. In the 2015 bill as passed by the Lok Sabha, this period was &amp;ldquo;a period specified for setting up the project or five years, whichever was later&amp;rdquo; (clause 101).&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Some doubts were raised about the word &amp;lsquo;utilization&amp;rsquo; &amp;ndash; should land be deemed to have been utilized if a boundary wall is built? This matter is still under discussion.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Section 46 of LARR 2015 related to extending rehabilitation and resettlement benefits to land owners in case of purchase of land through private negotiations in excess of 100 acres. The government is ready to scrap this.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Industry Secretary Amitabh Kant who recently deposed before the committee said that the most contentious issue &amp;ndash; land required for industrial corridors upto 1 km on either side of the road - should be exempt from SIA and Consent clauses as the land (mostly) belonged to Indian Railways any way. He said this should never have been in the LARR legislation in the first place.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The government might relent and take Industrial corridors out of the purview of the bill.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
In the end however, the general fear is that given the opposition majority in the Rajya Sabha, the LARR bill passed by the upper house may be a deeply diluted version of the government&amp;rsquo;s own 2015 bill. This will leave the government with only two choices &amp;ndash; get the Lok Sabha to ratify the bill as amended by the Rajya Sabha that will be marginally different from the 2013 bill widely perceived as anti-industry; or push for the Lok Sabha version of the LARR 2015 to be passed by the upper house, wait for it to fall and then have it passed in a joint sitting of the two Houses.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
There is a third choice: that the government works on breaking the opposition by isolating the Congress. That doesn&amp;rsquo;t seem politically feasible.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
In the interim, in the absence of central guidance, state governments will be free to acquire land in the manner they think fit.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Under the 2013 law, only two big parcels of land have been acquired so far: one for a road in Punjab, built primarily to service a hotel owned by the family of Chief Minister Parkash Singh Badal; and one in Odisha. It was to telescope the time taken in acquiring land that the government had pressed for the 2015 amendments. However, recognising the reality that the NDA does not have majority in the Rajya Sabha, Prime Minister Modi had resolved to let state governments take the final call in the matter and make one last effort to take the opposition on board on an amended version of the 2015 legislation. Now it seems even that might not materialise.
&lt;/div&gt;&#039;,
	&#039;credit_writer&#039; =&gt; &#039;Business Standard, 31 July, 2015, http://www.business-standard.com/article/politics/govt-could-compromise-on-land-bill-2015-115073101352_1.html&#039;,
	&#039;article_img&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
	&#039;article_img_thumb&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
	&#039;status&#039; =&gt; (int) 1,
	&#039;show_on_home&#039; =&gt; (int) 1,
	&#039;lang&#039; =&gt; &#039;EN&#039;,
	&#039;category_id&#039; =&gt; (int) 16,
	&#039;tag_keyword&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
	&#039;seo_url&#039; =&gt; &#039;govt-could-compromise-on-land-bill-2015-aditi-phadnis-4676850&#039;,
	&#039;meta_title&#039; =&gt; null,
	&#039;meta_keywords&#039; =&gt; null,
	&#039;meta_description&#039; =&gt; null,
	&#039;noindex&#039; =&gt; (int) 0,
	&#039;publish_date&#039; =&gt; object(Cake\I18n\FrozenDate) {},
	&#039;most_visit_section_id&#039; =&gt; null,
	&#039;article_big_img&#039; =&gt; null,
	&#039;liveid&#039; =&gt; (int) 4676850,
	&#039;created&#039; =&gt; object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {},
	&#039;modified&#039; =&gt; object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {},
	&#039;edate&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
	&#039;tags&#039; =&gt; [
		(int) 0 =&gt; object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {},
		(int) 1 =&gt; object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {},
		(int) 2 =&gt; object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {},
		(int) 3 =&gt; object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {},
		(int) 4 =&gt; object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {},
		(int) 5 =&gt; object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {},
		(int) 6 =&gt; object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {},
		(int) 7 =&gt; object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {}
	],
	&#039;category&#039; =&gt; object(App\Model\Entity\Category) {},
	&#039;[new]&#039; =&gt; false,
	&#039;[accessible]&#039; =&gt; [
		&#039;*&#039; =&gt; true,
		&#039;id&#039; =&gt; false
	],
	&#039;[dirty]&#039; =&gt; [],
	&#039;[original]&#039; =&gt; [],
	&#039;[virtual]&#039; =&gt; [],
	&#039;[hasErrors]&#039; =&gt; false,
	&#039;[errors]&#039; =&gt; [],
	&#039;[invalid]&#039; =&gt; [],
	&#039;[repository]&#039; =&gt; &#039;Articles&#039;

}
$articleid = (int) 28797
$metaTitle = &#039;LATEST NEWS UPDATES | Govt could compromise on Land Bill 2015 -Aditi Phadnis&#039;
$metaKeywords = &#039;Social Impact Assessment,Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Rehabilitation and Resettlement law,Consent,Land Acquisition,Land Acquisition Act,land acquisition and rehabilitation,Land Acquisition Bill,Land Alienation&#039;
$metaDesc = &#039;
-Business Standard

Even amended version passed by Lok Sabha could be diluted

Reconciled to the fact that it will have no option but to cave in to the diktat of the opposition on the 2015 Land Acquisition Resettlement and Rehabilitation (LARR) Bill...&#039;
$disp = &#039;&lt;div align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;-Business Standard&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;em&gt;Even amended version passed by Lok Sabha could be diluted&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/em&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Reconciled to the fact that it will have no option but to cave in to the diktat of the opposition on the 2015 Land Acquisition Resettlement and Rehabilitation (LARR) Bill in the Rajya Sabha where it is in a minority, the Narendra Modi-led National Democratic Alliance (NDA) government is preparing to virtually abandon its own bill.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;This could cause even more legislative and policy confusion on land acquisition.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;The 2013 LARR was amended and replaced by LARR 2015, to make land acquisition easier for certain categories of projects, to give a boost to industrial activity. The requirement of Social Impact Analysis (SIA) and consent of land losers was waived for this category. Lok Sabha passed LARR 2015 and 44 MPs of the Congress walked out to show they disagreed with the amendments.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;When the Bill came to the Rajya Sabha, it demanded a parliamentary panel to study the bill as even its amended version had been changed substantially by the Lok Sabha. The committee which has 15 BJP members and 15 from other parties, and is headed by MP from Darjeeling, S S Ahluwalia, is likely to give its report on 5 August. Clause-by-clause discussion will begin from Monday.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;According to sources in the committee, most BJP MPs are inexperienced and unschooled about the finer points of law. The proceedings are dominated by former Rural Development Minister and architect of the 2013 law, Jairam Ramesh and former Madhya Pradesh Chief Minister, Digvijay Singh, assisted ably by Trinamool Congress leader Kalyan Bannerjee. The balance of advantage is with the opposition and the BJP MPs are intellectually unable to hold their own.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;The net result is substantial dilution of the LARR 2015 &amp;ndash; even the amended version passed by the Lok Sabha.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;The opposition in the Select Committee, for instance is united that acquired land which is not utilized for three years should be returned to land losers. In the 2015 bill as passed by the Lok Sabha, this period was &amp;ldquo;a period specified for setting up the project or five years, whichever was later&amp;rdquo; (clause 101).&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Some doubts were raised about the word &amp;lsquo;utilization&amp;rsquo; &amp;ndash; should land be deemed to have been utilized if a boundary wall is built? This matter is still under discussion.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Section 46 of LARR 2015 related to extending rehabilitation and resettlement benefits to land owners in case of purchase of land through private negotiations in excess of 100 acres. The government is ready to scrap this.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Industry Secretary Amitabh Kant who recently deposed before the committee said that the most contentious issue &amp;ndash; land required for industrial corridors upto 1 km on either side of the road - should be exempt from SIA and Consent clauses as the land (mostly) belonged to Indian Railways any way. He said this should never have been in the LARR legislation in the first place.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;The government might relent and take Industrial corridors out of the purview of the bill.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;In the end however, the general fear is that given the opposition majority in the Rajya Sabha, the LARR bill passed by the upper house may be a deeply diluted version of the government&amp;rsquo;s own 2015 bill. This will leave the government with only two choices &amp;ndash; get the Lok Sabha to ratify the bill as amended by the Rajya Sabha that will be marginally different from the 2013 bill widely perceived as anti-industry; or push for the Lok Sabha version of the LARR 2015 to be passed by the upper house, wait for it to fall and then have it passed in a joint sitting of the two Houses.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;There is a third choice: that the government works on breaking the opposition by isolating the Congress. That doesn&amp;rsquo;t seem politically feasible.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;In the interim, in the absence of central guidance, state governments will be free to acquire land in the manner they think fit.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Under the 2013 law, only two big parcels of land have been acquired so far: one for a road in Punjab, built primarily to service a hotel owned by the family of Chief Minister Parkash Singh Badal; and one in Odisha. It was to telescope the time taken in acquiring land that the government had pressed for the 2015 amendments. However, recognising the reality that the NDA does not have majority in the Rajya Sabha, Prime Minister Modi had resolved to let state governments take the final call in the matter and make one last effort to take the opposition on board on an amended version of the 2015 legislation. Now it seems even that might not materialise.&lt;/div&gt;&#039;
$lang = &#039;English&#039;
$SITE_URL = &#039;https://im4change.in/&#039;
$site_title = &#039;im4change&#039;
$adminprix = &#039;admin&#039;</pre><pre class="stack-trace">include - APP/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp, line 8
Cake\View\View::_evaluate() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 1413
Cake\View\View::_render() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 1374
Cake\View\View::renderLayout() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 927
Cake\View\View::render() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 885
Cake\Controller\Controller::render() - CORE/src/Controller/Controller.php, line 791
Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::_invoke() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 126
Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::dispatch() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 94
Cake\Http\BaseApplication::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/BaseApplication.php, line 235
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Routing\Middleware\RoutingMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/RoutingMiddleware.php, line 162
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Routing\Middleware\AssetMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/AssetMiddleware.php, line 88
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Error\Middleware\ErrorHandlerMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Error/Middleware/ErrorHandlerMiddleware.php, line 96
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Http\Runner::run() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 51</pre></div></pre>latest-news-updates/govt-could-compromise-on-land-bill-2015-aditi-phadnis-4676850.html"/>
    <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"/>
    <link href="https://im4change.in/css/control.css" rel="stylesheet" type="text/css"
          media="all"/>
    <title>LATEST NEWS UPDATES | Govt could compromise on Land Bill 2015 -Aditi Phadnis | Im4change.org</title>
    <meta name="description" content="
-Business Standard

Even amended version passed by Lok Sabha could be diluted

Reconciled to the fact that it will have no option but to cave in to the diktat of the opposition on the 2015 Land Acquisition Resettlement and Rehabilitation (LARR) Bill..."/>
    <script src="https://im4change.in/js/jquery-1.10.2.js"></script>
    <script type="text/javascript" src="https://im4change.in/js/jquery-migrate.min.js"></script>
    <script language="javascript" type="text/javascript">

        $(document).ready(function () {
            var img = $("img")[0]; // Get my img elem
            var pic_real_width, pic_real_height;
            $("<img/>") // Make in memory copy of image to avoid css issues
                .attr("src", $(img).attr("src"))
                .load(function () {
                    pic_real_width = this.width;   // Note: $(this).width() will not
                    pic_real_height = this.height; // work for in memory images.
                });
        });
    </script>
    <style type="text/css">
        @media screen {
            div.divFooter {
                display: block;
            }
        }

        @media print {
            .printbutton {
                display: none !important;
            }
        }
    </style>
</head>
<body>
<table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" border="0" width="98%" align="center">
    <tr>
        <td class="top_bg">
            <div class="divFooter">
                <img src="https://im4change.in/images/logo1.jpg" height="59" border="0"
                     alt="Resource centre on India's rural distress" style="padding-top:14px;"/>
            </div>

        </td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
        <td id="topspace">&nbsp;</td>
    </tr>

    <tr id="topspace">
        <td>&nbsp;</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
        <td height="50" style="border-bottom:1px solid #000; padding-top:10px;" class="printbutton">
            <form><input type="button" value=" Print this page "
                         onclick="window.print();return false;"/></form>
        </td>
    </tr>

    <tr>
        <td width="100%">
            <h1 class="news_headlines" style="font-style:normal">
                <strong>Govt could compromise on Land Bill 2015 -Aditi Phadnis</strong></h1>
        </td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
        <td width="100%" style="font-family:Arial, 'Segoe Script', 'Segoe UI', sans-serif, serif"><font size="3">
                <div align="justify">-Business Standard<br /><br /><em>Even amended version passed by Lok Sabha could be diluted<br /></em><br />Reconciled to the fact that it will have no option but to cave in to the diktat of the opposition on the 2015 Land Acquisition Resettlement and Rehabilitation (LARR) Bill in the Rajya Sabha where it is in a minority, the Narendra Modi-led National Democratic Alliance (NDA) government is preparing to virtually abandon its own bill.<br /><br />This could cause even more legislative and policy confusion on land acquisition.<br /><br />The 2013 LARR was amended and replaced by LARR 2015, to make land acquisition easier for certain categories of projects, to give a boost to industrial activity. The requirement of Social Impact Analysis (SIA) and consent of land losers was waived for this category. Lok Sabha passed LARR 2015 and 44 MPs of the Congress walked out to show they disagreed with the amendments.<br /><br />When the Bill came to the Rajya Sabha, it demanded a parliamentary panel to study the bill as even its amended version had been changed substantially by the Lok Sabha. The committee which has 15 BJP members and 15 from other parties, and is headed by MP from Darjeeling, S S Ahluwalia, is likely to give its report on 5 August. Clause-by-clause discussion will begin from Monday.<br /><br />According to sources in the committee, most BJP MPs are inexperienced and unschooled about the finer points of law. The proceedings are dominated by former Rural Development Minister and architect of the 2013 law, Jairam Ramesh and former Madhya Pradesh Chief Minister, Digvijay Singh, assisted ably by Trinamool Congress leader Kalyan Bannerjee. The balance of advantage is with the opposition and the BJP MPs are intellectually unable to hold their own.<br /><br />The net result is substantial dilution of the LARR 2015 &ndash; even the amended version passed by the Lok Sabha.<br /><br />The opposition in the Select Committee, for instance is united that acquired land which is not utilized for three years should be returned to land losers. In the 2015 bill as passed by the Lok Sabha, this period was &ldquo;a period specified for setting up the project or five years, whichever was later&rdquo; (clause 101).<br /><br />Some doubts were raised about the word &lsquo;utilization&rsquo; &ndash; should land be deemed to have been utilized if a boundary wall is built? This matter is still under discussion.<br /><br />Section 46 of LARR 2015 related to extending rehabilitation and resettlement benefits to land owners in case of purchase of land through private negotiations in excess of 100 acres. The government is ready to scrap this.<br /><br />Industry Secretary Amitabh Kant who recently deposed before the committee said that the most contentious issue &ndash; land required for industrial corridors upto 1 km on either side of the road - should be exempt from SIA and Consent clauses as the land (mostly) belonged to Indian Railways any way. He said this should never have been in the LARR legislation in the first place.<br /><br />The government might relent and take Industrial corridors out of the purview of the bill.<br /><br />In the end however, the general fear is that given the opposition majority in the Rajya Sabha, the LARR bill passed by the upper house may be a deeply diluted version of the government&rsquo;s own 2015 bill. This will leave the government with only two choices &ndash; get the Lok Sabha to ratify the bill as amended by the Rajya Sabha that will be marginally different from the 2013 bill widely perceived as anti-industry; or push for the Lok Sabha version of the LARR 2015 to be passed by the upper house, wait for it to fall and then have it passed in a joint sitting of the two Houses.<br /><br />There is a third choice: that the government works on breaking the opposition by isolating the Congress. That doesn&rsquo;t seem politically feasible.<br /><br />In the interim, in the absence of central guidance, state governments will be free to acquire land in the manner they think fit.<br /><br />Under the 2013 law, only two big parcels of land have been acquired so far: one for a road in Punjab, built primarily to service a hotel owned by the family of Chief Minister Parkash Singh Badal; and one in Odisha. It was to telescope the time taken in acquiring land that the government had pressed for the 2015 amendments. However, recognising the reality that the NDA does not have majority in the Rajya Sabha, Prime Minister Modi had resolved to let state governments take the final call in the matter and make one last effort to take the opposition on board on an amended version of the 2015 legislation. Now it seems even that might not materialise.</div>               </font>
        </td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
        <td>&nbsp;</td>
    </tr>

    <tr>
        <td height="50" style="border-top:1px solid #000; border-bottom:1px solid #000;padding-top:10px;">
            <form><input type="button" value=" Print this page "
                         onclick="window.print();return false;"/></form>
        </td>
    </tr>
</table></body>
</html>'

}
$maxBufferLength = (int) 8192
$file = '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Error/Debugger.php'
$line = (int) 853
$message = 'Unable to emit headers. Headers sent in file=/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Error/Debugger.php line=853'
Cake\Http\ResponseEmitter::emit() - CORE/src/Http/ResponseEmitter.php, line 48
Cake\Http\Server::emit() - CORE/src/Http/Server.php, line 141
[main] - ROOT/webroot/index.php, line 39

Warning (2): Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Error/Debugger.php:853) [CORE/src/Http/ResponseEmitter.php, line 148]
Code Context
            $response->getStatusCode(),

            ($reasonPhrase ? ' ' . $reasonPhrase : '')

        ));
$response = object(Cake\Http\Response) {

	'status' => (int) 200,
	'contentType' => 'text/html',
	'headers' => [
		'Content-Type' => [
			[maximum depth reached]
		]
	],
	'file' => null,
	'fileRange' => [],
	'cookies' => object(Cake\Http\Cookie\CookieCollection) {},
	'cacheDirectives' => [],
	'body' => '<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Transitional//EN"
        "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-transitional.dtd">
<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">
<head>
    <link rel="canonical" href="https://im4change.in/<pre class="cake-error"><a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="document.getElementById('cakeErr67fffc4897f3c-trace').style.display = (document.getElementById('cakeErr67fffc4897f3c-trace').style.display == 'none' ? '' : 'none');"><b>Notice</b> (8)</a>: Undefined variable: urlPrefix [<b>APP/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp</b>, line <b>8</b>]<div id="cakeErr67fffc4897f3c-trace" class="cake-stack-trace" style="display: none;"><a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="document.getElementById('cakeErr67fffc4897f3c-code').style.display = (document.getElementById('cakeErr67fffc4897f3c-code').style.display == 'none' ? '' : 'none')">Code</a> <a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="document.getElementById('cakeErr67fffc4897f3c-context').style.display = (document.getElementById('cakeErr67fffc4897f3c-context').style.display == 'none' ? '' : 'none')">Context</a><pre id="cakeErr67fffc4897f3c-code" class="cake-code-dump" style="display: none;"><code><span style="color: #000000"><span style="color: #0000BB"></span><span style="color: #007700">&lt;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">head</span><span style="color: #007700">&gt;
</span></span></code>
<span class="code-highlight"><code><span style="color: #000000">&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&lt;link&nbsp;rel="canonical"&nbsp;href="<span style="color: #0000BB">&lt;?php&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #007700">echo&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">Configure</span><span style="color: #007700">::</span><span style="color: #0000BB">read</span><span style="color: #007700">(</span><span style="color: #DD0000">'SITE_URL'</span><span style="color: #007700">);&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">?&gt;&lt;?php&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #007700">echo&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">$urlPrefix</span><span style="color: #007700">;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">?&gt;&lt;?php&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #007700">echo&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">$article_current</span><span style="color: #007700">-&gt;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">category</span><span style="color: #007700">-&gt;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">slug</span><span style="color: #007700">;&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">?&gt;</span>/<span style="color: #0000BB">&lt;?php&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #007700">echo&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">$article_current</span><span style="color: #007700">-&gt;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">seo_url</span><span style="color: #007700">;&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">?&gt;</span>.html"/&gt;
</span></code></span>
<code><span style="color: #000000"><span style="color: #0000BB">&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #007700">&lt;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">meta&nbsp;http</span><span style="color: #007700">-</span><span style="color: #0000BB">equiv</span><span style="color: #007700">=</span><span style="color: #DD0000">"Content-Type"&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">content</span><span style="color: #007700">=</span><span style="color: #DD0000">"text/html;&nbsp;charset=utf-8"</span><span style="color: #007700">/&gt;
</span></span></code></pre><pre id="cakeErr67fffc4897f3c-context" class="cake-context" style="display: none;">$viewFile = &#039;/home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp&#039;
$dataForView = [
	&#039;article_current&#039; =&gt; object(App\Model\Entity\Article) {

		&#039;id&#039; =&gt; (int) 28797,
		&#039;title&#039; =&gt; &#039;Govt could compromise on Land Bill 2015 -Aditi Phadnis&#039;,
		&#039;subheading&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
		&#039;description&#039; =&gt; &#039;&lt;div align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;
-Business Standard&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;em&gt;Even amended version passed by Lok Sabha could be diluted&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;/em&gt;&lt;br /&gt;
Reconciled to the fact that it will have no option but to cave in to the diktat of the opposition on the 2015 Land Acquisition Resettlement and Rehabilitation (LARR) Bill in the Rajya Sabha where it is in a minority, the Narendra Modi-led National Democratic Alliance (NDA) government is preparing to virtually abandon its own bill.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
This could cause even more legislative and policy confusion on land acquisition.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The 2013 LARR was amended and replaced by LARR 2015, to make land acquisition easier for certain categories of projects, to give a boost to industrial activity. The requirement of Social Impact Analysis (SIA) and consent of land losers was waived for this category. Lok Sabha passed LARR 2015 and 44 MPs of the Congress walked out to show they disagreed with the amendments.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
When the Bill came to the Rajya Sabha, it demanded a parliamentary panel to study the bill as even its amended version had been changed substantially by the Lok Sabha. The committee which has 15 BJP members and 15 from other parties, and is headed by MP from Darjeeling, S S Ahluwalia, is likely to give its report on 5 August. Clause-by-clause discussion will begin from Monday.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
According to sources in the committee, most BJP MPs are inexperienced and unschooled about the finer points of law. The proceedings are dominated by former Rural Development Minister and architect of the 2013 law, Jairam Ramesh and former Madhya Pradesh Chief Minister, Digvijay Singh, assisted ably by Trinamool Congress leader Kalyan Bannerjee. The balance of advantage is with the opposition and the BJP MPs are intellectually unable to hold their own.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The net result is substantial dilution of the LARR 2015 &amp;ndash; even the amended version passed by the Lok Sabha.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The opposition in the Select Committee, for instance is united that acquired land which is not utilized for three years should be returned to land losers. In the 2015 bill as passed by the Lok Sabha, this period was &amp;ldquo;a period specified for setting up the project or five years, whichever was later&amp;rdquo; (clause 101).&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Some doubts were raised about the word &amp;lsquo;utilization&amp;rsquo; &amp;ndash; should land be deemed to have been utilized if a boundary wall is built? This matter is still under discussion.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Section 46 of LARR 2015 related to extending rehabilitation and resettlement benefits to land owners in case of purchase of land through private negotiations in excess of 100 acres. The government is ready to scrap this.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Industry Secretary Amitabh Kant who recently deposed before the committee said that the most contentious issue &amp;ndash; land required for industrial corridors upto 1 km on either side of the road - should be exempt from SIA and Consent clauses as the land (mostly) belonged to Indian Railways any way. He said this should never have been in the LARR legislation in the first place.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The government might relent and take Industrial corridors out of the purview of the bill.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
In the end however, the general fear is that given the opposition majority in the Rajya Sabha, the LARR bill passed by the upper house may be a deeply diluted version of the government&amp;rsquo;s own 2015 bill. This will leave the government with only two choices &amp;ndash; get the Lok Sabha to ratify the bill as amended by the Rajya Sabha that will be marginally different from the 2013 bill widely perceived as anti-industry; or push for the Lok Sabha version of the LARR 2015 to be passed by the upper house, wait for it to fall and then have it passed in a joint sitting of the two Houses.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
There is a third choice: that the government works on breaking the opposition by isolating the Congress. That doesn&amp;rsquo;t seem politically feasible.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
In the interim, in the absence of central guidance, state governments will be free to acquire land in the manner they think fit.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Under the 2013 law, only two big parcels of land have been acquired so far: one for a road in Punjab, built primarily to service a hotel owned by the family of Chief Minister Parkash Singh Badal; and one in Odisha. It was to telescope the time taken in acquiring land that the government had pressed for the 2015 amendments. However, recognising the reality that the NDA does not have majority in the Rajya Sabha, Prime Minister Modi had resolved to let state governments take the final call in the matter and make one last effort to take the opposition on board on an amended version of the 2015 legislation. Now it seems even that might not materialise.
&lt;/div&gt;&#039;,
		&#039;credit_writer&#039; =&gt; &#039;Business Standard, 31 July, 2015, http://www.business-standard.com/article/politics/govt-could-compromise-on-land-bill-2015-115073101352_1.html&#039;,
		&#039;article_img&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
		&#039;article_img_thumb&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
		&#039;status&#039; =&gt; (int) 1,
		&#039;show_on_home&#039; =&gt; (int) 1,
		&#039;lang&#039; =&gt; &#039;EN&#039;,
		&#039;category_id&#039; =&gt; (int) 16,
		&#039;tag_keyword&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
		&#039;seo_url&#039; =&gt; &#039;govt-could-compromise-on-land-bill-2015-aditi-phadnis-4676850&#039;,
		&#039;meta_title&#039; =&gt; null,
		&#039;meta_keywords&#039; =&gt; null,
		&#039;meta_description&#039; =&gt; null,
		&#039;noindex&#039; =&gt; (int) 0,
		&#039;publish_date&#039; =&gt; object(Cake\I18n\FrozenDate) {},
		&#039;most_visit_section_id&#039; =&gt; null,
		&#039;article_big_img&#039; =&gt; null,
		&#039;liveid&#039; =&gt; (int) 4676850,
		&#039;created&#039; =&gt; object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {},
		&#039;modified&#039; =&gt; object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {},
		&#039;edate&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
		&#039;tags&#039; =&gt; [
			[maximum depth reached]
		],
		&#039;category&#039; =&gt; object(App\Model\Entity\Category) {},
		&#039;[new]&#039; =&gt; false,
		&#039;[accessible]&#039; =&gt; [
			[maximum depth reached]
		],
		&#039;[dirty]&#039; =&gt; [[maximum depth reached]],
		&#039;[original]&#039; =&gt; [[maximum depth reached]],
		&#039;[virtual]&#039; =&gt; [[maximum depth reached]],
		&#039;[hasErrors]&#039; =&gt; false,
		&#039;[errors]&#039; =&gt; [[maximum depth reached]],
		&#039;[invalid]&#039; =&gt; [[maximum depth reached]],
		&#039;[repository]&#039; =&gt; &#039;Articles&#039;
	
	},
	&#039;articleid&#039; =&gt; (int) 28797,
	&#039;metaTitle&#039; =&gt; &#039;LATEST NEWS UPDATES | Govt could compromise on Land Bill 2015 -Aditi Phadnis&#039;,
	&#039;metaKeywords&#039; =&gt; &#039;Social Impact Assessment,Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Rehabilitation and Resettlement law,Consent,Land Acquisition,Land Acquisition Act,land acquisition and rehabilitation,Land Acquisition Bill,Land Alienation&#039;,
	&#039;metaDesc&#039; =&gt; &#039;
-Business Standard

Even amended version passed by Lok Sabha could be diluted

Reconciled to the fact that it will have no option but to cave in to the diktat of the opposition on the 2015 Land Acquisition Resettlement and Rehabilitation (LARR) Bill...&#039;,
	&#039;disp&#039; =&gt; &#039;&lt;div align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;-Business Standard&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;em&gt;Even amended version passed by Lok Sabha could be diluted&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/em&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Reconciled to the fact that it will have no option but to cave in to the diktat of the opposition on the 2015 Land Acquisition Resettlement and Rehabilitation (LARR) Bill in the Rajya Sabha where it is in a minority, the Narendra Modi-led National Democratic Alliance (NDA) government is preparing to virtually abandon its own bill.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;This could cause even more legislative and policy confusion on land acquisition.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;The 2013 LARR was amended and replaced by LARR 2015, to make land acquisition easier for certain categories of projects, to give a boost to industrial activity. The requirement of Social Impact Analysis (SIA) and consent of land losers was waived for this category. Lok Sabha passed LARR 2015 and 44 MPs of the Congress walked out to show they disagreed with the amendments.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;When the Bill came to the Rajya Sabha, it demanded a parliamentary panel to study the bill as even its amended version had been changed substantially by the Lok Sabha. The committee which has 15 BJP members and 15 from other parties, and is headed by MP from Darjeeling, S S Ahluwalia, is likely to give its report on 5 August. Clause-by-clause discussion will begin from Monday.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;According to sources in the committee, most BJP MPs are inexperienced and unschooled about the finer points of law. The proceedings are dominated by former Rural Development Minister and architect of the 2013 law, Jairam Ramesh and former Madhya Pradesh Chief Minister, Digvijay Singh, assisted ably by Trinamool Congress leader Kalyan Bannerjee. The balance of advantage is with the opposition and the BJP MPs are intellectually unable to hold their own.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;The net result is substantial dilution of the LARR 2015 &amp;ndash; even the amended version passed by the Lok Sabha.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;The opposition in the Select Committee, for instance is united that acquired land which is not utilized for three years should be returned to land losers. In the 2015 bill as passed by the Lok Sabha, this period was &amp;ldquo;a period specified for setting up the project or five years, whichever was later&amp;rdquo; (clause 101).&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Some doubts were raised about the word &amp;lsquo;utilization&amp;rsquo; &amp;ndash; should land be deemed to have been utilized if a boundary wall is built? This matter is still under discussion.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Section 46 of LARR 2015 related to extending rehabilitation and resettlement benefits to land owners in case of purchase of land through private negotiations in excess of 100 acres. The government is ready to scrap this.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Industry Secretary Amitabh Kant who recently deposed before the committee said that the most contentious issue &amp;ndash; land required for industrial corridors upto 1 km on either side of the road - should be exempt from SIA and Consent clauses as the land (mostly) belonged to Indian Railways any way. He said this should never have been in the LARR legislation in the first place.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;The government might relent and take Industrial corridors out of the purview of the bill.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;In the end however, the general fear is that given the opposition majority in the Rajya Sabha, the LARR bill passed by the upper house may be a deeply diluted version of the government&amp;rsquo;s own 2015 bill. This will leave the government with only two choices &amp;ndash; get the Lok Sabha to ratify the bill as amended by the Rajya Sabha that will be marginally different from the 2013 bill widely perceived as anti-industry; or push for the Lok Sabha version of the LARR 2015 to be passed by the upper house, wait for it to fall and then have it passed in a joint sitting of the two Houses.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;There is a third choice: that the government works on breaking the opposition by isolating the Congress. That doesn&amp;rsquo;t seem politically feasible.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;In the interim, in the absence of central guidance, state governments will be free to acquire land in the manner they think fit.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Under the 2013 law, only two big parcels of land have been acquired so far: one for a road in Punjab, built primarily to service a hotel owned by the family of Chief Minister Parkash Singh Badal; and one in Odisha. It was to telescope the time taken in acquiring land that the government had pressed for the 2015 amendments. However, recognising the reality that the NDA does not have majority in the Rajya Sabha, Prime Minister Modi had resolved to let state governments take the final call in the matter and make one last effort to take the opposition on board on an amended version of the 2015 legislation. Now it seems even that might not materialise.&lt;/div&gt;&#039;,
	&#039;lang&#039; =&gt; &#039;English&#039;,
	&#039;SITE_URL&#039; =&gt; &#039;https://im4change.in/&#039;,
	&#039;site_title&#039; =&gt; &#039;im4change&#039;,
	&#039;adminprix&#039; =&gt; &#039;admin&#039;
]
$article_current = object(App\Model\Entity\Article) {

	&#039;id&#039; =&gt; (int) 28797,
	&#039;title&#039; =&gt; &#039;Govt could compromise on Land Bill 2015 -Aditi Phadnis&#039;,
	&#039;subheading&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
	&#039;description&#039; =&gt; &#039;&lt;div align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;
-Business Standard&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;em&gt;Even amended version passed by Lok Sabha could be diluted&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;/em&gt;&lt;br /&gt;
Reconciled to the fact that it will have no option but to cave in to the diktat of the opposition on the 2015 Land Acquisition Resettlement and Rehabilitation (LARR) Bill in the Rajya Sabha where it is in a minority, the Narendra Modi-led National Democratic Alliance (NDA) government is preparing to virtually abandon its own bill.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
This could cause even more legislative and policy confusion on land acquisition.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The 2013 LARR was amended and replaced by LARR 2015, to make land acquisition easier for certain categories of projects, to give a boost to industrial activity. The requirement of Social Impact Analysis (SIA) and consent of land losers was waived for this category. Lok Sabha passed LARR 2015 and 44 MPs of the Congress walked out to show they disagreed with the amendments.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
When the Bill came to the Rajya Sabha, it demanded a parliamentary panel to study the bill as even its amended version had been changed substantially by the Lok Sabha. The committee which has 15 BJP members and 15 from other parties, and is headed by MP from Darjeeling, S S Ahluwalia, is likely to give its report on 5 August. Clause-by-clause discussion will begin from Monday.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
According to sources in the committee, most BJP MPs are inexperienced and unschooled about the finer points of law. The proceedings are dominated by former Rural Development Minister and architect of the 2013 law, Jairam Ramesh and former Madhya Pradesh Chief Minister, Digvijay Singh, assisted ably by Trinamool Congress leader Kalyan Bannerjee. The balance of advantage is with the opposition and the BJP MPs are intellectually unable to hold their own.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The net result is substantial dilution of the LARR 2015 &amp;ndash; even the amended version passed by the Lok Sabha.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The opposition in the Select Committee, for instance is united that acquired land which is not utilized for three years should be returned to land losers. In the 2015 bill as passed by the Lok Sabha, this period was &amp;ldquo;a period specified for setting up the project or five years, whichever was later&amp;rdquo; (clause 101).&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Some doubts were raised about the word &amp;lsquo;utilization&amp;rsquo; &amp;ndash; should land be deemed to have been utilized if a boundary wall is built? This matter is still under discussion.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Section 46 of LARR 2015 related to extending rehabilitation and resettlement benefits to land owners in case of purchase of land through private negotiations in excess of 100 acres. The government is ready to scrap this.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Industry Secretary Amitabh Kant who recently deposed before the committee said that the most contentious issue &amp;ndash; land required for industrial corridors upto 1 km on either side of the road - should be exempt from SIA and Consent clauses as the land (mostly) belonged to Indian Railways any way. He said this should never have been in the LARR legislation in the first place.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The government might relent and take Industrial corridors out of the purview of the bill.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
In the end however, the general fear is that given the opposition majority in the Rajya Sabha, the LARR bill passed by the upper house may be a deeply diluted version of the government&amp;rsquo;s own 2015 bill. This will leave the government with only two choices &amp;ndash; get the Lok Sabha to ratify the bill as amended by the Rajya Sabha that will be marginally different from the 2013 bill widely perceived as anti-industry; or push for the Lok Sabha version of the LARR 2015 to be passed by the upper house, wait for it to fall and then have it passed in a joint sitting of the two Houses.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
There is a third choice: that the government works on breaking the opposition by isolating the Congress. That doesn&amp;rsquo;t seem politically feasible.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
In the interim, in the absence of central guidance, state governments will be free to acquire land in the manner they think fit.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Under the 2013 law, only two big parcels of land have been acquired so far: one for a road in Punjab, built primarily to service a hotel owned by the family of Chief Minister Parkash Singh Badal; and one in Odisha. It was to telescope the time taken in acquiring land that the government had pressed for the 2015 amendments. However, recognising the reality that the NDA does not have majority in the Rajya Sabha, Prime Minister Modi had resolved to let state governments take the final call in the matter and make one last effort to take the opposition on board on an amended version of the 2015 legislation. Now it seems even that might not materialise.
&lt;/div&gt;&#039;,
	&#039;credit_writer&#039; =&gt; &#039;Business Standard, 31 July, 2015, http://www.business-standard.com/article/politics/govt-could-compromise-on-land-bill-2015-115073101352_1.html&#039;,
	&#039;article_img&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
	&#039;article_img_thumb&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
	&#039;status&#039; =&gt; (int) 1,
	&#039;show_on_home&#039; =&gt; (int) 1,
	&#039;lang&#039; =&gt; &#039;EN&#039;,
	&#039;category_id&#039; =&gt; (int) 16,
	&#039;tag_keyword&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
	&#039;seo_url&#039; =&gt; &#039;govt-could-compromise-on-land-bill-2015-aditi-phadnis-4676850&#039;,
	&#039;meta_title&#039; =&gt; null,
	&#039;meta_keywords&#039; =&gt; null,
	&#039;meta_description&#039; =&gt; null,
	&#039;noindex&#039; =&gt; (int) 0,
	&#039;publish_date&#039; =&gt; object(Cake\I18n\FrozenDate) {},
	&#039;most_visit_section_id&#039; =&gt; null,
	&#039;article_big_img&#039; =&gt; null,
	&#039;liveid&#039; =&gt; (int) 4676850,
	&#039;created&#039; =&gt; object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {},
	&#039;modified&#039; =&gt; object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {},
	&#039;edate&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
	&#039;tags&#039; =&gt; [
		(int) 0 =&gt; object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {},
		(int) 1 =&gt; object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {},
		(int) 2 =&gt; object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {},
		(int) 3 =&gt; object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {},
		(int) 4 =&gt; object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {},
		(int) 5 =&gt; object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {},
		(int) 6 =&gt; object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {},
		(int) 7 =&gt; object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {}
	],
	&#039;category&#039; =&gt; object(App\Model\Entity\Category) {},
	&#039;[new]&#039; =&gt; false,
	&#039;[accessible]&#039; =&gt; [
		&#039;*&#039; =&gt; true,
		&#039;id&#039; =&gt; false
	],
	&#039;[dirty]&#039; =&gt; [],
	&#039;[original]&#039; =&gt; [],
	&#039;[virtual]&#039; =&gt; [],
	&#039;[hasErrors]&#039; =&gt; false,
	&#039;[errors]&#039; =&gt; [],
	&#039;[invalid]&#039; =&gt; [],
	&#039;[repository]&#039; =&gt; &#039;Articles&#039;

}
$articleid = (int) 28797
$metaTitle = &#039;LATEST NEWS UPDATES | Govt could compromise on Land Bill 2015 -Aditi Phadnis&#039;
$metaKeywords = &#039;Social Impact Assessment,Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Rehabilitation and Resettlement law,Consent,Land Acquisition,Land Acquisition Act,land acquisition and rehabilitation,Land Acquisition Bill,Land Alienation&#039;
$metaDesc = &#039;
-Business Standard

Even amended version passed by Lok Sabha could be diluted

Reconciled to the fact that it will have no option but to cave in to the diktat of the opposition on the 2015 Land Acquisition Resettlement and Rehabilitation (LARR) Bill...&#039;
$disp = &#039;&lt;div align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;-Business Standard&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;em&gt;Even amended version passed by Lok Sabha could be diluted&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/em&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Reconciled to the fact that it will have no option but to cave in to the diktat of the opposition on the 2015 Land Acquisition Resettlement and Rehabilitation (LARR) Bill in the Rajya Sabha where it is in a minority, the Narendra Modi-led National Democratic Alliance (NDA) government is preparing to virtually abandon its own bill.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;This could cause even more legislative and policy confusion on land acquisition.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;The 2013 LARR was amended and replaced by LARR 2015, to make land acquisition easier for certain categories of projects, to give a boost to industrial activity. The requirement of Social Impact Analysis (SIA) and consent of land losers was waived for this category. Lok Sabha passed LARR 2015 and 44 MPs of the Congress walked out to show they disagreed with the amendments.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;When the Bill came to the Rajya Sabha, it demanded a parliamentary panel to study the bill as even its amended version had been changed substantially by the Lok Sabha. The committee which has 15 BJP members and 15 from other parties, and is headed by MP from Darjeeling, S S Ahluwalia, is likely to give its report on 5 August. Clause-by-clause discussion will begin from Monday.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;According to sources in the committee, most BJP MPs are inexperienced and unschooled about the finer points of law. The proceedings are dominated by former Rural Development Minister and architect of the 2013 law, Jairam Ramesh and former Madhya Pradesh Chief Minister, Digvijay Singh, assisted ably by Trinamool Congress leader Kalyan Bannerjee. The balance of advantage is with the opposition and the BJP MPs are intellectually unable to hold their own.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;The net result is substantial dilution of the LARR 2015 &amp;ndash; even the amended version passed by the Lok Sabha.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;The opposition in the Select Committee, for instance is united that acquired land which is not utilized for three years should be returned to land losers. In the 2015 bill as passed by the Lok Sabha, this period was &amp;ldquo;a period specified for setting up the project or five years, whichever was later&amp;rdquo; (clause 101).&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Some doubts were raised about the word &amp;lsquo;utilization&amp;rsquo; &amp;ndash; should land be deemed to have been utilized if a boundary wall is built? This matter is still under discussion.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Section 46 of LARR 2015 related to extending rehabilitation and resettlement benefits to land owners in case of purchase of land through private negotiations in excess of 100 acres. The government is ready to scrap this.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Industry Secretary Amitabh Kant who recently deposed before the committee said that the most contentious issue &amp;ndash; land required for industrial corridors upto 1 km on either side of the road - should be exempt from SIA and Consent clauses as the land (mostly) belonged to Indian Railways any way. He said this should never have been in the LARR legislation in the first place.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;The government might relent and take Industrial corridors out of the purview of the bill.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;In the end however, the general fear is that given the opposition majority in the Rajya Sabha, the LARR bill passed by the upper house may be a deeply diluted version of the government&amp;rsquo;s own 2015 bill. This will leave the government with only two choices &amp;ndash; get the Lok Sabha to ratify the bill as amended by the Rajya Sabha that will be marginally different from the 2013 bill widely perceived as anti-industry; or push for the Lok Sabha version of the LARR 2015 to be passed by the upper house, wait for it to fall and then have it passed in a joint sitting of the two Houses.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;There is a third choice: that the government works on breaking the opposition by isolating the Congress. That doesn&amp;rsquo;t seem politically feasible.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;In the interim, in the absence of central guidance, state governments will be free to acquire land in the manner they think fit.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Under the 2013 law, only two big parcels of land have been acquired so far: one for a road in Punjab, built primarily to service a hotel owned by the family of Chief Minister Parkash Singh Badal; and one in Odisha. It was to telescope the time taken in acquiring land that the government had pressed for the 2015 amendments. However, recognising the reality that the NDA does not have majority in the Rajya Sabha, Prime Minister Modi had resolved to let state governments take the final call in the matter and make one last effort to take the opposition on board on an amended version of the 2015 legislation. Now it seems even that might not materialise.&lt;/div&gt;&#039;
$lang = &#039;English&#039;
$SITE_URL = &#039;https://im4change.in/&#039;
$site_title = &#039;im4change&#039;
$adminprix = &#039;admin&#039;</pre><pre class="stack-trace">include - APP/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp, line 8
Cake\View\View::_evaluate() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 1413
Cake\View\View::_render() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 1374
Cake\View\View::renderLayout() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 927
Cake\View\View::render() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 885
Cake\Controller\Controller::render() - CORE/src/Controller/Controller.php, line 791
Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::_invoke() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 126
Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::dispatch() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 94
Cake\Http\BaseApplication::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/BaseApplication.php, line 235
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Routing\Middleware\RoutingMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/RoutingMiddleware.php, line 162
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Routing\Middleware\AssetMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/AssetMiddleware.php, line 88
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Error\Middleware\ErrorHandlerMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Error/Middleware/ErrorHandlerMiddleware.php, line 96
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Http\Runner::run() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 51</pre></div></pre>latest-news-updates/govt-could-compromise-on-land-bill-2015-aditi-phadnis-4676850.html"/>
    <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"/>
    <link href="https://im4change.in/css/control.css" rel="stylesheet" type="text/css"
          media="all"/>
    <title>LATEST NEWS UPDATES | Govt could compromise on Land Bill 2015 -Aditi Phadnis | Im4change.org</title>
    <meta name="description" content="
-Business Standard

Even amended version passed by Lok Sabha could be diluted

Reconciled to the fact that it will have no option but to cave in to the diktat of the opposition on the 2015 Land Acquisition Resettlement and Rehabilitation (LARR) Bill..."/>
    <script src="https://im4change.in/js/jquery-1.10.2.js"></script>
    <script type="text/javascript" src="https://im4change.in/js/jquery-migrate.min.js"></script>
    <script language="javascript" type="text/javascript">

        $(document).ready(function () {
            var img = $("img")[0]; // Get my img elem
            var pic_real_width, pic_real_height;
            $("<img/>") // Make in memory copy of image to avoid css issues
                .attr("src", $(img).attr("src"))
                .load(function () {
                    pic_real_width = this.width;   // Note: $(this).width() will not
                    pic_real_height = this.height; // work for in memory images.
                });
        });
    </script>
    <style type="text/css">
        @media screen {
            div.divFooter {
                display: block;
            }
        }

        @media print {
            .printbutton {
                display: none !important;
            }
        }
    </style>
</head>
<body>
<table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" border="0" width="98%" align="center">
    <tr>
        <td class="top_bg">
            <div class="divFooter">
                <img src="https://im4change.in/images/logo1.jpg" height="59" border="0"
                     alt="Resource centre on India's rural distress" style="padding-top:14px;"/>
            </div>

        </td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
        <td id="topspace">&nbsp;</td>
    </tr>

    <tr id="topspace">
        <td>&nbsp;</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
        <td height="50" style="border-bottom:1px solid #000; padding-top:10px;" class="printbutton">
            <form><input type="button" value=" Print this page "
                         onclick="window.print();return false;"/></form>
        </td>
    </tr>

    <tr>
        <td width="100%">
            <h1 class="news_headlines" style="font-style:normal">
                <strong>Govt could compromise on Land Bill 2015 -Aditi Phadnis</strong></h1>
        </td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
        <td width="100%" style="font-family:Arial, 'Segoe Script', 'Segoe UI', sans-serif, serif"><font size="3">
                <div align="justify">-Business Standard<br /><br /><em>Even amended version passed by Lok Sabha could be diluted<br /></em><br />Reconciled to the fact that it will have no option but to cave in to the diktat of the opposition on the 2015 Land Acquisition Resettlement and Rehabilitation (LARR) Bill in the Rajya Sabha where it is in a minority, the Narendra Modi-led National Democratic Alliance (NDA) government is preparing to virtually abandon its own bill.<br /><br />This could cause even more legislative and policy confusion on land acquisition.<br /><br />The 2013 LARR was amended and replaced by LARR 2015, to make land acquisition easier for certain categories of projects, to give a boost to industrial activity. The requirement of Social Impact Analysis (SIA) and consent of land losers was waived for this category. Lok Sabha passed LARR 2015 and 44 MPs of the Congress walked out to show they disagreed with the amendments.<br /><br />When the Bill came to the Rajya Sabha, it demanded a parliamentary panel to study the bill as even its amended version had been changed substantially by the Lok Sabha. The committee which has 15 BJP members and 15 from other parties, and is headed by MP from Darjeeling, S S Ahluwalia, is likely to give its report on 5 August. Clause-by-clause discussion will begin from Monday.<br /><br />According to sources in the committee, most BJP MPs are inexperienced and unschooled about the finer points of law. The proceedings are dominated by former Rural Development Minister and architect of the 2013 law, Jairam Ramesh and former Madhya Pradesh Chief Minister, Digvijay Singh, assisted ably by Trinamool Congress leader Kalyan Bannerjee. The balance of advantage is with the opposition and the BJP MPs are intellectually unable to hold their own.<br /><br />The net result is substantial dilution of the LARR 2015 &ndash; even the amended version passed by the Lok Sabha.<br /><br />The opposition in the Select Committee, for instance is united that acquired land which is not utilized for three years should be returned to land losers. In the 2015 bill as passed by the Lok Sabha, this period was &ldquo;a period specified for setting up the project or five years, whichever was later&rdquo; (clause 101).<br /><br />Some doubts were raised about the word &lsquo;utilization&rsquo; &ndash; should land be deemed to have been utilized if a boundary wall is built? This matter is still under discussion.<br /><br />Section 46 of LARR 2015 related to extending rehabilitation and resettlement benefits to land owners in case of purchase of land through private negotiations in excess of 100 acres. The government is ready to scrap this.<br /><br />Industry Secretary Amitabh Kant who recently deposed before the committee said that the most contentious issue &ndash; land required for industrial corridors upto 1 km on either side of the road - should be exempt from SIA and Consent clauses as the land (mostly) belonged to Indian Railways any way. He said this should never have been in the LARR legislation in the first place.<br /><br />The government might relent and take Industrial corridors out of the purview of the bill.<br /><br />In the end however, the general fear is that given the opposition majority in the Rajya Sabha, the LARR bill passed by the upper house may be a deeply diluted version of the government&rsquo;s own 2015 bill. This will leave the government with only two choices &ndash; get the Lok Sabha to ratify the bill as amended by the Rajya Sabha that will be marginally different from the 2013 bill widely perceived as anti-industry; or push for the Lok Sabha version of the LARR 2015 to be passed by the upper house, wait for it to fall and then have it passed in a joint sitting of the two Houses.<br /><br />There is a third choice: that the government works on breaking the opposition by isolating the Congress. That doesn&rsquo;t seem politically feasible.<br /><br />In the interim, in the absence of central guidance, state governments will be free to acquire land in the manner they think fit.<br /><br />Under the 2013 law, only two big parcels of land have been acquired so far: one for a road in Punjab, built primarily to service a hotel owned by the family of Chief Minister Parkash Singh Badal; and one in Odisha. It was to telescope the time taken in acquiring land that the government had pressed for the 2015 amendments. However, recognising the reality that the NDA does not have majority in the Rajya Sabha, Prime Minister Modi had resolved to let state governments take the final call in the matter and make one last effort to take the opposition on board on an amended version of the 2015 legislation. Now it seems even that might not materialise.</div>               </font>
        </td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
        <td>&nbsp;</td>
    </tr>

    <tr>
        <td height="50" style="border-top:1px solid #000; border-bottom:1px solid #000;padding-top:10px;">
            <form><input type="button" value=" Print this page "
                         onclick="window.print();return false;"/></form>
        </td>
    </tr>
</table></body>
</html>'

}
$reasonPhrase = 'OK'
header - [internal], line ??
Cake\Http\ResponseEmitter::emitStatusLine() - CORE/src/Http/ResponseEmitter.php, line 148
Cake\Http\ResponseEmitter::emit() - CORE/src/Http/ResponseEmitter.php, line 54
Cake\Http\Server::emit() - CORE/src/Http/Server.php, line 141
[main] - ROOT/webroot/index.php, line 39

Warning (2): Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Error/Debugger.php:853) [CORE/src/Http/ResponseEmitter.php, line 181]
Code Context
                    $value

                ), $first);

                $first = false;
$response = object(Cake\Http\Response) {

	'status' => (int) 200,
	'contentType' => 'text/html',
	'headers' => [
		'Content-Type' => [
			[maximum depth reached]
		]
	],
	'file' => null,
	'fileRange' => [],
	'cookies' => object(Cake\Http\Cookie\CookieCollection) {},
	'cacheDirectives' => [],
	'body' => '<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Transitional//EN"
        "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-transitional.dtd">
<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">
<head>
    <link rel="canonical" href="https://im4change.in/<pre class="cake-error"><a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="document.getElementById('cakeErr67fffc4897f3c-trace').style.display = (document.getElementById('cakeErr67fffc4897f3c-trace').style.display == 'none' ? '' : 'none');"><b>Notice</b> (8)</a>: Undefined variable: urlPrefix [<b>APP/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp</b>, line <b>8</b>]<div id="cakeErr67fffc4897f3c-trace" class="cake-stack-trace" style="display: none;"><a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="document.getElementById('cakeErr67fffc4897f3c-code').style.display = (document.getElementById('cakeErr67fffc4897f3c-code').style.display == 'none' ? '' : 'none')">Code</a> <a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="document.getElementById('cakeErr67fffc4897f3c-context').style.display = (document.getElementById('cakeErr67fffc4897f3c-context').style.display == 'none' ? '' : 'none')">Context</a><pre id="cakeErr67fffc4897f3c-code" class="cake-code-dump" style="display: none;"><code><span style="color: #000000"><span style="color: #0000BB"></span><span style="color: #007700">&lt;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">head</span><span style="color: #007700">&gt;
</span></span></code>
<span class="code-highlight"><code><span style="color: #000000">&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&lt;link&nbsp;rel="canonical"&nbsp;href="<span style="color: #0000BB">&lt;?php&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #007700">echo&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">Configure</span><span style="color: #007700">::</span><span style="color: #0000BB">read</span><span style="color: #007700">(</span><span style="color: #DD0000">'SITE_URL'</span><span style="color: #007700">);&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">?&gt;&lt;?php&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #007700">echo&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">$urlPrefix</span><span style="color: #007700">;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">?&gt;&lt;?php&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #007700">echo&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">$article_current</span><span style="color: #007700">-&gt;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">category</span><span style="color: #007700">-&gt;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">slug</span><span style="color: #007700">;&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">?&gt;</span>/<span style="color: #0000BB">&lt;?php&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #007700">echo&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">$article_current</span><span style="color: #007700">-&gt;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">seo_url</span><span style="color: #007700">;&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">?&gt;</span>.html"/&gt;
</span></code></span>
<code><span style="color: #000000"><span style="color: #0000BB">&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #007700">&lt;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">meta&nbsp;http</span><span style="color: #007700">-</span><span style="color: #0000BB">equiv</span><span style="color: #007700">=</span><span style="color: #DD0000">"Content-Type"&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">content</span><span style="color: #007700">=</span><span style="color: #DD0000">"text/html;&nbsp;charset=utf-8"</span><span style="color: #007700">/&gt;
</span></span></code></pre><pre id="cakeErr67fffc4897f3c-context" class="cake-context" style="display: none;">$viewFile = &#039;/home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp&#039;
$dataForView = [
	&#039;article_current&#039; =&gt; object(App\Model\Entity\Article) {

		&#039;id&#039; =&gt; (int) 28797,
		&#039;title&#039; =&gt; &#039;Govt could compromise on Land Bill 2015 -Aditi Phadnis&#039;,
		&#039;subheading&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
		&#039;description&#039; =&gt; &#039;&lt;div align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;
-Business Standard&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;em&gt;Even amended version passed by Lok Sabha could be diluted&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;/em&gt;&lt;br /&gt;
Reconciled to the fact that it will have no option but to cave in to the diktat of the opposition on the 2015 Land Acquisition Resettlement and Rehabilitation (LARR) Bill in the Rajya Sabha where it is in a minority, the Narendra Modi-led National Democratic Alliance (NDA) government is preparing to virtually abandon its own bill.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
This could cause even more legislative and policy confusion on land acquisition.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The 2013 LARR was amended and replaced by LARR 2015, to make land acquisition easier for certain categories of projects, to give a boost to industrial activity. The requirement of Social Impact Analysis (SIA) and consent of land losers was waived for this category. Lok Sabha passed LARR 2015 and 44 MPs of the Congress walked out to show they disagreed with the amendments.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
When the Bill came to the Rajya Sabha, it demanded a parliamentary panel to study the bill as even its amended version had been changed substantially by the Lok Sabha. The committee which has 15 BJP members and 15 from other parties, and is headed by MP from Darjeeling, S S Ahluwalia, is likely to give its report on 5 August. Clause-by-clause discussion will begin from Monday.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
According to sources in the committee, most BJP MPs are inexperienced and unschooled about the finer points of law. The proceedings are dominated by former Rural Development Minister and architect of the 2013 law, Jairam Ramesh and former Madhya Pradesh Chief Minister, Digvijay Singh, assisted ably by Trinamool Congress leader Kalyan Bannerjee. The balance of advantage is with the opposition and the BJP MPs are intellectually unable to hold their own.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The net result is substantial dilution of the LARR 2015 &amp;ndash; even the amended version passed by the Lok Sabha.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The opposition in the Select Committee, for instance is united that acquired land which is not utilized for three years should be returned to land losers. In the 2015 bill as passed by the Lok Sabha, this period was &amp;ldquo;a period specified for setting up the project or five years, whichever was later&amp;rdquo; (clause 101).&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Some doubts were raised about the word &amp;lsquo;utilization&amp;rsquo; &amp;ndash; should land be deemed to have been utilized if a boundary wall is built? This matter is still under discussion.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Section 46 of LARR 2015 related to extending rehabilitation and resettlement benefits to land owners in case of purchase of land through private negotiations in excess of 100 acres. The government is ready to scrap this.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Industry Secretary Amitabh Kant who recently deposed before the committee said that the most contentious issue &amp;ndash; land required for industrial corridors upto 1 km on either side of the road - should be exempt from SIA and Consent clauses as the land (mostly) belonged to Indian Railways any way. He said this should never have been in the LARR legislation in the first place.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The government might relent and take Industrial corridors out of the purview of the bill.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
In the end however, the general fear is that given the opposition majority in the Rajya Sabha, the LARR bill passed by the upper house may be a deeply diluted version of the government&amp;rsquo;s own 2015 bill. This will leave the government with only two choices &amp;ndash; get the Lok Sabha to ratify the bill as amended by the Rajya Sabha that will be marginally different from the 2013 bill widely perceived as anti-industry; or push for the Lok Sabha version of the LARR 2015 to be passed by the upper house, wait for it to fall and then have it passed in a joint sitting of the two Houses.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
There is a third choice: that the government works on breaking the opposition by isolating the Congress. That doesn&amp;rsquo;t seem politically feasible.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
In the interim, in the absence of central guidance, state governments will be free to acquire land in the manner they think fit.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Under the 2013 law, only two big parcels of land have been acquired so far: one for a road in Punjab, built primarily to service a hotel owned by the family of Chief Minister Parkash Singh Badal; and one in Odisha. It was to telescope the time taken in acquiring land that the government had pressed for the 2015 amendments. However, recognising the reality that the NDA does not have majority in the Rajya Sabha, Prime Minister Modi had resolved to let state governments take the final call in the matter and make one last effort to take the opposition on board on an amended version of the 2015 legislation. Now it seems even that might not materialise.
&lt;/div&gt;&#039;,
		&#039;credit_writer&#039; =&gt; &#039;Business Standard, 31 July, 2015, http://www.business-standard.com/article/politics/govt-could-compromise-on-land-bill-2015-115073101352_1.html&#039;,
		&#039;article_img&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
		&#039;article_img_thumb&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
		&#039;status&#039; =&gt; (int) 1,
		&#039;show_on_home&#039; =&gt; (int) 1,
		&#039;lang&#039; =&gt; &#039;EN&#039;,
		&#039;category_id&#039; =&gt; (int) 16,
		&#039;tag_keyword&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
		&#039;seo_url&#039; =&gt; &#039;govt-could-compromise-on-land-bill-2015-aditi-phadnis-4676850&#039;,
		&#039;meta_title&#039; =&gt; null,
		&#039;meta_keywords&#039; =&gt; null,
		&#039;meta_description&#039; =&gt; null,
		&#039;noindex&#039; =&gt; (int) 0,
		&#039;publish_date&#039; =&gt; object(Cake\I18n\FrozenDate) {},
		&#039;most_visit_section_id&#039; =&gt; null,
		&#039;article_big_img&#039; =&gt; null,
		&#039;liveid&#039; =&gt; (int) 4676850,
		&#039;created&#039; =&gt; object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {},
		&#039;modified&#039; =&gt; object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {},
		&#039;edate&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
		&#039;tags&#039; =&gt; [
			[maximum depth reached]
		],
		&#039;category&#039; =&gt; object(App\Model\Entity\Category) {},
		&#039;[new]&#039; =&gt; false,
		&#039;[accessible]&#039; =&gt; [
			[maximum depth reached]
		],
		&#039;[dirty]&#039; =&gt; [[maximum depth reached]],
		&#039;[original]&#039; =&gt; [[maximum depth reached]],
		&#039;[virtual]&#039; =&gt; [[maximum depth reached]],
		&#039;[hasErrors]&#039; =&gt; false,
		&#039;[errors]&#039; =&gt; [[maximum depth reached]],
		&#039;[invalid]&#039; =&gt; [[maximum depth reached]],
		&#039;[repository]&#039; =&gt; &#039;Articles&#039;
	
	},
	&#039;articleid&#039; =&gt; (int) 28797,
	&#039;metaTitle&#039; =&gt; &#039;LATEST NEWS UPDATES | Govt could compromise on Land Bill 2015 -Aditi Phadnis&#039;,
	&#039;metaKeywords&#039; =&gt; &#039;Social Impact Assessment,Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Rehabilitation and Resettlement law,Consent,Land Acquisition,Land Acquisition Act,land acquisition and rehabilitation,Land Acquisition Bill,Land Alienation&#039;,
	&#039;metaDesc&#039; =&gt; &#039;
-Business Standard

Even amended version passed by Lok Sabha could be diluted

Reconciled to the fact that it will have no option but to cave in to the diktat of the opposition on the 2015 Land Acquisition Resettlement and Rehabilitation (LARR) Bill...&#039;,
	&#039;disp&#039; =&gt; &#039;&lt;div align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;-Business Standard&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;em&gt;Even amended version passed by Lok Sabha could be diluted&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/em&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Reconciled to the fact that it will have no option but to cave in to the diktat of the opposition on the 2015 Land Acquisition Resettlement and Rehabilitation (LARR) Bill in the Rajya Sabha where it is in a minority, the Narendra Modi-led National Democratic Alliance (NDA) government is preparing to virtually abandon its own bill.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;This could cause even more legislative and policy confusion on land acquisition.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;The 2013 LARR was amended and replaced by LARR 2015, to make land acquisition easier for certain categories of projects, to give a boost to industrial activity. The requirement of Social Impact Analysis (SIA) and consent of land losers was waived for this category. Lok Sabha passed LARR 2015 and 44 MPs of the Congress walked out to show they disagreed with the amendments.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;When the Bill came to the Rajya Sabha, it demanded a parliamentary panel to study the bill as even its amended version had been changed substantially by the Lok Sabha. The committee which has 15 BJP members and 15 from other parties, and is headed by MP from Darjeeling, S S Ahluwalia, is likely to give its report on 5 August. Clause-by-clause discussion will begin from Monday.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;According to sources in the committee, most BJP MPs are inexperienced and unschooled about the finer points of law. The proceedings are dominated by former Rural Development Minister and architect of the 2013 law, Jairam Ramesh and former Madhya Pradesh Chief Minister, Digvijay Singh, assisted ably by Trinamool Congress leader Kalyan Bannerjee. The balance of advantage is with the opposition and the BJP MPs are intellectually unable to hold their own.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;The net result is substantial dilution of the LARR 2015 &amp;ndash; even the amended version passed by the Lok Sabha.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;The opposition in the Select Committee, for instance is united that acquired land which is not utilized for three years should be returned to land losers. In the 2015 bill as passed by the Lok Sabha, this period was &amp;ldquo;a period specified for setting up the project or five years, whichever was later&amp;rdquo; (clause 101).&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Some doubts were raised about the word &amp;lsquo;utilization&amp;rsquo; &amp;ndash; should land be deemed to have been utilized if a boundary wall is built? This matter is still under discussion.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Section 46 of LARR 2015 related to extending rehabilitation and resettlement benefits to land owners in case of purchase of land through private negotiations in excess of 100 acres. The government is ready to scrap this.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Industry Secretary Amitabh Kant who recently deposed before the committee said that the most contentious issue &amp;ndash; land required for industrial corridors upto 1 km on either side of the road - should be exempt from SIA and Consent clauses as the land (mostly) belonged to Indian Railways any way. He said this should never have been in the LARR legislation in the first place.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;The government might relent and take Industrial corridors out of the purview of the bill.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;In the end however, the general fear is that given the opposition majority in the Rajya Sabha, the LARR bill passed by the upper house may be a deeply diluted version of the government&amp;rsquo;s own 2015 bill. This will leave the government with only two choices &amp;ndash; get the Lok Sabha to ratify the bill as amended by the Rajya Sabha that will be marginally different from the 2013 bill widely perceived as anti-industry; or push for the Lok Sabha version of the LARR 2015 to be passed by the upper house, wait for it to fall and then have it passed in a joint sitting of the two Houses.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;There is a third choice: that the government works on breaking the opposition by isolating the Congress. That doesn&amp;rsquo;t seem politically feasible.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;In the interim, in the absence of central guidance, state governments will be free to acquire land in the manner they think fit.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Under the 2013 law, only two big parcels of land have been acquired so far: one for a road in Punjab, built primarily to service a hotel owned by the family of Chief Minister Parkash Singh Badal; and one in Odisha. It was to telescope the time taken in acquiring land that the government had pressed for the 2015 amendments. However, recognising the reality that the NDA does not have majority in the Rajya Sabha, Prime Minister Modi had resolved to let state governments take the final call in the matter and make one last effort to take the opposition on board on an amended version of the 2015 legislation. Now it seems even that might not materialise.&lt;/div&gt;&#039;,
	&#039;lang&#039; =&gt; &#039;English&#039;,
	&#039;SITE_URL&#039; =&gt; &#039;https://im4change.in/&#039;,
	&#039;site_title&#039; =&gt; &#039;im4change&#039;,
	&#039;adminprix&#039; =&gt; &#039;admin&#039;
]
$article_current = object(App\Model\Entity\Article) {

	&#039;id&#039; =&gt; (int) 28797,
	&#039;title&#039; =&gt; &#039;Govt could compromise on Land Bill 2015 -Aditi Phadnis&#039;,
	&#039;subheading&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
	&#039;description&#039; =&gt; &#039;&lt;div align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;
-Business Standard&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;em&gt;Even amended version passed by Lok Sabha could be diluted&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;/em&gt;&lt;br /&gt;
Reconciled to the fact that it will have no option but to cave in to the diktat of the opposition on the 2015 Land Acquisition Resettlement and Rehabilitation (LARR) Bill in the Rajya Sabha where it is in a minority, the Narendra Modi-led National Democratic Alliance (NDA) government is preparing to virtually abandon its own bill.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
This could cause even more legislative and policy confusion on land acquisition.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The 2013 LARR was amended and replaced by LARR 2015, to make land acquisition easier for certain categories of projects, to give a boost to industrial activity. The requirement of Social Impact Analysis (SIA) and consent of land losers was waived for this category. Lok Sabha passed LARR 2015 and 44 MPs of the Congress walked out to show they disagreed with the amendments.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
When the Bill came to the Rajya Sabha, it demanded a parliamentary panel to study the bill as even its amended version had been changed substantially by the Lok Sabha. The committee which has 15 BJP members and 15 from other parties, and is headed by MP from Darjeeling, S S Ahluwalia, is likely to give its report on 5 August. Clause-by-clause discussion will begin from Monday.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
According to sources in the committee, most BJP MPs are inexperienced and unschooled about the finer points of law. The proceedings are dominated by former Rural Development Minister and architect of the 2013 law, Jairam Ramesh and former Madhya Pradesh Chief Minister, Digvijay Singh, assisted ably by Trinamool Congress leader Kalyan Bannerjee. The balance of advantage is with the opposition and the BJP MPs are intellectually unable to hold their own.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The net result is substantial dilution of the LARR 2015 &amp;ndash; even the amended version passed by the Lok Sabha.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The opposition in the Select Committee, for instance is united that acquired land which is not utilized for three years should be returned to land losers. In the 2015 bill as passed by the Lok Sabha, this period was &amp;ldquo;a period specified for setting up the project or five years, whichever was later&amp;rdquo; (clause 101).&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Some doubts were raised about the word &amp;lsquo;utilization&amp;rsquo; &amp;ndash; should land be deemed to have been utilized if a boundary wall is built? This matter is still under discussion.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Section 46 of LARR 2015 related to extending rehabilitation and resettlement benefits to land owners in case of purchase of land through private negotiations in excess of 100 acres. The government is ready to scrap this.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Industry Secretary Amitabh Kant who recently deposed before the committee said that the most contentious issue &amp;ndash; land required for industrial corridors upto 1 km on either side of the road - should be exempt from SIA and Consent clauses as the land (mostly) belonged to Indian Railways any way. He said this should never have been in the LARR legislation in the first place.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The government might relent and take Industrial corridors out of the purview of the bill.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
In the end however, the general fear is that given the opposition majority in the Rajya Sabha, the LARR bill passed by the upper house may be a deeply diluted version of the government&amp;rsquo;s own 2015 bill. This will leave the government with only two choices &amp;ndash; get the Lok Sabha to ratify the bill as amended by the Rajya Sabha that will be marginally different from the 2013 bill widely perceived as anti-industry; or push for the Lok Sabha version of the LARR 2015 to be passed by the upper house, wait for it to fall and then have it passed in a joint sitting of the two Houses.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
There is a third choice: that the government works on breaking the opposition by isolating the Congress. That doesn&amp;rsquo;t seem politically feasible.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
In the interim, in the absence of central guidance, state governments will be free to acquire land in the manner they think fit.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Under the 2013 law, only two big parcels of land have been acquired so far: one for a road in Punjab, built primarily to service a hotel owned by the family of Chief Minister Parkash Singh Badal; and one in Odisha. It was to telescope the time taken in acquiring land that the government had pressed for the 2015 amendments. However, recognising the reality that the NDA does not have majority in the Rajya Sabha, Prime Minister Modi had resolved to let state governments take the final call in the matter and make one last effort to take the opposition on board on an amended version of the 2015 legislation. Now it seems even that might not materialise.
&lt;/div&gt;&#039;,
	&#039;credit_writer&#039; =&gt; &#039;Business Standard, 31 July, 2015, http://www.business-standard.com/article/politics/govt-could-compromise-on-land-bill-2015-115073101352_1.html&#039;,
	&#039;article_img&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
	&#039;article_img_thumb&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
	&#039;status&#039; =&gt; (int) 1,
	&#039;show_on_home&#039; =&gt; (int) 1,
	&#039;lang&#039; =&gt; &#039;EN&#039;,
	&#039;category_id&#039; =&gt; (int) 16,
	&#039;tag_keyword&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
	&#039;seo_url&#039; =&gt; &#039;govt-could-compromise-on-land-bill-2015-aditi-phadnis-4676850&#039;,
	&#039;meta_title&#039; =&gt; null,
	&#039;meta_keywords&#039; =&gt; null,
	&#039;meta_description&#039; =&gt; null,
	&#039;noindex&#039; =&gt; (int) 0,
	&#039;publish_date&#039; =&gt; object(Cake\I18n\FrozenDate) {},
	&#039;most_visit_section_id&#039; =&gt; null,
	&#039;article_big_img&#039; =&gt; null,
	&#039;liveid&#039; =&gt; (int) 4676850,
	&#039;created&#039; =&gt; object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {},
	&#039;modified&#039; =&gt; object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {},
	&#039;edate&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
	&#039;tags&#039; =&gt; [
		(int) 0 =&gt; object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {},
		(int) 1 =&gt; object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {},
		(int) 2 =&gt; object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {},
		(int) 3 =&gt; object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {},
		(int) 4 =&gt; object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {},
		(int) 5 =&gt; object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {},
		(int) 6 =&gt; object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {},
		(int) 7 =&gt; object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {}
	],
	&#039;category&#039; =&gt; object(App\Model\Entity\Category) {},
	&#039;[new]&#039; =&gt; false,
	&#039;[accessible]&#039; =&gt; [
		&#039;*&#039; =&gt; true,
		&#039;id&#039; =&gt; false
	],
	&#039;[dirty]&#039; =&gt; [],
	&#039;[original]&#039; =&gt; [],
	&#039;[virtual]&#039; =&gt; [],
	&#039;[hasErrors]&#039; =&gt; false,
	&#039;[errors]&#039; =&gt; [],
	&#039;[invalid]&#039; =&gt; [],
	&#039;[repository]&#039; =&gt; &#039;Articles&#039;

}
$articleid = (int) 28797
$metaTitle = &#039;LATEST NEWS UPDATES | Govt could compromise on Land Bill 2015 -Aditi Phadnis&#039;
$metaKeywords = &#039;Social Impact Assessment,Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Rehabilitation and Resettlement law,Consent,Land Acquisition,Land Acquisition Act,land acquisition and rehabilitation,Land Acquisition Bill,Land Alienation&#039;
$metaDesc = &#039;
-Business Standard

Even amended version passed by Lok Sabha could be diluted

Reconciled to the fact that it will have no option but to cave in to the diktat of the opposition on the 2015 Land Acquisition Resettlement and Rehabilitation (LARR) Bill...&#039;
$disp = &#039;&lt;div align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;-Business Standard&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;em&gt;Even amended version passed by Lok Sabha could be diluted&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/em&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Reconciled to the fact that it will have no option but to cave in to the diktat of the opposition on the 2015 Land Acquisition Resettlement and Rehabilitation (LARR) Bill in the Rajya Sabha where it is in a minority, the Narendra Modi-led National Democratic Alliance (NDA) government is preparing to virtually abandon its own bill.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;This could cause even more legislative and policy confusion on land acquisition.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;The 2013 LARR was amended and replaced by LARR 2015, to make land acquisition easier for certain categories of projects, to give a boost to industrial activity. The requirement of Social Impact Analysis (SIA) and consent of land losers was waived for this category. Lok Sabha passed LARR 2015 and 44 MPs of the Congress walked out to show they disagreed with the amendments.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;When the Bill came to the Rajya Sabha, it demanded a parliamentary panel to study the bill as even its amended version had been changed substantially by the Lok Sabha. The committee which has 15 BJP members and 15 from other parties, and is headed by MP from Darjeeling, S S Ahluwalia, is likely to give its report on 5 August. Clause-by-clause discussion will begin from Monday.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;According to sources in the committee, most BJP MPs are inexperienced and unschooled about the finer points of law. The proceedings are dominated by former Rural Development Minister and architect of the 2013 law, Jairam Ramesh and former Madhya Pradesh Chief Minister, Digvijay Singh, assisted ably by Trinamool Congress leader Kalyan Bannerjee. The balance of advantage is with the opposition and the BJP MPs are intellectually unable to hold their own.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;The net result is substantial dilution of the LARR 2015 &amp;ndash; even the amended version passed by the Lok Sabha.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;The opposition in the Select Committee, for instance is united that acquired land which is not utilized for three years should be returned to land losers. In the 2015 bill as passed by the Lok Sabha, this period was &amp;ldquo;a period specified for setting up the project or five years, whichever was later&amp;rdquo; (clause 101).&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Some doubts were raised about the word &amp;lsquo;utilization&amp;rsquo; &amp;ndash; should land be deemed to have been utilized if a boundary wall is built? This matter is still under discussion.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Section 46 of LARR 2015 related to extending rehabilitation and resettlement benefits to land owners in case of purchase of land through private negotiations in excess of 100 acres. The government is ready to scrap this.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Industry Secretary Amitabh Kant who recently deposed before the committee said that the most contentious issue &amp;ndash; land required for industrial corridors upto 1 km on either side of the road - should be exempt from SIA and Consent clauses as the land (mostly) belonged to Indian Railways any way. He said this should never have been in the LARR legislation in the first place.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;The government might relent and take Industrial corridors out of the purview of the bill.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;In the end however, the general fear is that given the opposition majority in the Rajya Sabha, the LARR bill passed by the upper house may be a deeply diluted version of the government&amp;rsquo;s own 2015 bill. This will leave the government with only two choices &amp;ndash; get the Lok Sabha to ratify the bill as amended by the Rajya Sabha that will be marginally different from the 2013 bill widely perceived as anti-industry; or push for the Lok Sabha version of the LARR 2015 to be passed by the upper house, wait for it to fall and then have it passed in a joint sitting of the two Houses.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;There is a third choice: that the government works on breaking the opposition by isolating the Congress. That doesn&amp;rsquo;t seem politically feasible.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;In the interim, in the absence of central guidance, state governments will be free to acquire land in the manner they think fit.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Under the 2013 law, only two big parcels of land have been acquired so far: one for a road in Punjab, built primarily to service a hotel owned by the family of Chief Minister Parkash Singh Badal; and one in Odisha. It was to telescope the time taken in acquiring land that the government had pressed for the 2015 amendments. However, recognising the reality that the NDA does not have majority in the Rajya Sabha, Prime Minister Modi had resolved to let state governments take the final call in the matter and make one last effort to take the opposition on board on an amended version of the 2015 legislation. Now it seems even that might not materialise.&lt;/div&gt;&#039;
$lang = &#039;English&#039;
$SITE_URL = &#039;https://im4change.in/&#039;
$site_title = &#039;im4change&#039;
$adminprix = &#039;admin&#039;</pre><pre class="stack-trace">include - APP/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp, line 8
Cake\View\View::_evaluate() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 1413
Cake\View\View::_render() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 1374
Cake\View\View::renderLayout() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 927
Cake\View\View::render() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 885
Cake\Controller\Controller::render() - CORE/src/Controller/Controller.php, line 791
Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::_invoke() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 126
Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::dispatch() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 94
Cake\Http\BaseApplication::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/BaseApplication.php, line 235
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Routing\Middleware\RoutingMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/RoutingMiddleware.php, line 162
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Routing\Middleware\AssetMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/AssetMiddleware.php, line 88
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Error\Middleware\ErrorHandlerMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Error/Middleware/ErrorHandlerMiddleware.php, line 96
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Http\Runner::run() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 51</pre></div></pre>latest-news-updates/govt-could-compromise-on-land-bill-2015-aditi-phadnis-4676850.html"/>
    <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"/>
    <link href="https://im4change.in/css/control.css" rel="stylesheet" type="text/css"
          media="all"/>
    <title>LATEST NEWS UPDATES | Govt could compromise on Land Bill 2015 -Aditi Phadnis | Im4change.org</title>
    <meta name="description" content="
-Business Standard

Even amended version passed by Lok Sabha could be diluted

Reconciled to the fact that it will have no option but to cave in to the diktat of the opposition on the 2015 Land Acquisition Resettlement and Rehabilitation (LARR) Bill..."/>
    <script src="https://im4change.in/js/jquery-1.10.2.js"></script>
    <script type="text/javascript" src="https://im4change.in/js/jquery-migrate.min.js"></script>
    <script language="javascript" type="text/javascript">

        $(document).ready(function () {
            var img = $("img")[0]; // Get my img elem
            var pic_real_width, pic_real_height;
            $("<img/>") // Make in memory copy of image to avoid css issues
                .attr("src", $(img).attr("src"))
                .load(function () {
                    pic_real_width = this.width;   // Note: $(this).width() will not
                    pic_real_height = this.height; // work for in memory images.
                });
        });
    </script>
    <style type="text/css">
        @media screen {
            div.divFooter {
                display: block;
            }
        }

        @media print {
            .printbutton {
                display: none !important;
            }
        }
    </style>
</head>
<body>
<table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" border="0" width="98%" align="center">
    <tr>
        <td class="top_bg">
            <div class="divFooter">
                <img src="https://im4change.in/images/logo1.jpg" height="59" border="0"
                     alt="Resource centre on India's rural distress" style="padding-top:14px;"/>
            </div>

        </td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
        <td id="topspace">&nbsp;</td>
    </tr>

    <tr id="topspace">
        <td>&nbsp;</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
        <td height="50" style="border-bottom:1px solid #000; padding-top:10px;" class="printbutton">
            <form><input type="button" value=" Print this page "
                         onclick="window.print();return false;"/></form>
        </td>
    </tr>

    <tr>
        <td width="100%">
            <h1 class="news_headlines" style="font-style:normal">
                <strong>Govt could compromise on Land Bill 2015 -Aditi Phadnis</strong></h1>
        </td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
        <td width="100%" style="font-family:Arial, 'Segoe Script', 'Segoe UI', sans-serif, serif"><font size="3">
                <div align="justify">-Business Standard<br /><br /><em>Even amended version passed by Lok Sabha could be diluted<br /></em><br />Reconciled to the fact that it will have no option but to cave in to the diktat of the opposition on the 2015 Land Acquisition Resettlement and Rehabilitation (LARR) Bill in the Rajya Sabha where it is in a minority, the Narendra Modi-led National Democratic Alliance (NDA) government is preparing to virtually abandon its own bill.<br /><br />This could cause even more legislative and policy confusion on land acquisition.<br /><br />The 2013 LARR was amended and replaced by LARR 2015, to make land acquisition easier for certain categories of projects, to give a boost to industrial activity. The requirement of Social Impact Analysis (SIA) and consent of land losers was waived for this category. Lok Sabha passed LARR 2015 and 44 MPs of the Congress walked out to show they disagreed with the amendments.<br /><br />When the Bill came to the Rajya Sabha, it demanded a parliamentary panel to study the bill as even its amended version had been changed substantially by the Lok Sabha. The committee which has 15 BJP members and 15 from other parties, and is headed by MP from Darjeeling, S S Ahluwalia, is likely to give its report on 5 August. Clause-by-clause discussion will begin from Monday.<br /><br />According to sources in the committee, most BJP MPs are inexperienced and unschooled about the finer points of law. The proceedings are dominated by former Rural Development Minister and architect of the 2013 law, Jairam Ramesh and former Madhya Pradesh Chief Minister, Digvijay Singh, assisted ably by Trinamool Congress leader Kalyan Bannerjee. The balance of advantage is with the opposition and the BJP MPs are intellectually unable to hold their own.<br /><br />The net result is substantial dilution of the LARR 2015 &ndash; even the amended version passed by the Lok Sabha.<br /><br />The opposition in the Select Committee, for instance is united that acquired land which is not utilized for three years should be returned to land losers. In the 2015 bill as passed by the Lok Sabha, this period was &ldquo;a period specified for setting up the project or five years, whichever was later&rdquo; (clause 101).<br /><br />Some doubts were raised about the word &lsquo;utilization&rsquo; &ndash; should land be deemed to have been utilized if a boundary wall is built? This matter is still under discussion.<br /><br />Section 46 of LARR 2015 related to extending rehabilitation and resettlement benefits to land owners in case of purchase of land through private negotiations in excess of 100 acres. The government is ready to scrap this.<br /><br />Industry Secretary Amitabh Kant who recently deposed before the committee said that the most contentious issue &ndash; land required for industrial corridors upto 1 km on either side of the road - should be exempt from SIA and Consent clauses as the land (mostly) belonged to Indian Railways any way. He said this should never have been in the LARR legislation in the first place.<br /><br />The government might relent and take Industrial corridors out of the purview of the bill.<br /><br />In the end however, the general fear is that given the opposition majority in the Rajya Sabha, the LARR bill passed by the upper house may be a deeply diluted version of the government&rsquo;s own 2015 bill. This will leave the government with only two choices &ndash; get the Lok Sabha to ratify the bill as amended by the Rajya Sabha that will be marginally different from the 2013 bill widely perceived as anti-industry; or push for the Lok Sabha version of the LARR 2015 to be passed by the upper house, wait for it to fall and then have it passed in a joint sitting of the two Houses.<br /><br />There is a third choice: that the government works on breaking the opposition by isolating the Congress. That doesn&rsquo;t seem politically feasible.<br /><br />In the interim, in the absence of central guidance, state governments will be free to acquire land in the manner they think fit.<br /><br />Under the 2013 law, only two big parcels of land have been acquired so far: one for a road in Punjab, built primarily to service a hotel owned by the family of Chief Minister Parkash Singh Badal; and one in Odisha. It was to telescope the time taken in acquiring land that the government had pressed for the 2015 amendments. However, recognising the reality that the NDA does not have majority in the Rajya Sabha, Prime Minister Modi had resolved to let state governments take the final call in the matter and make one last effort to take the opposition on board on an amended version of the 2015 legislation. Now it seems even that might not materialise.</div>               </font>
        </td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
        <td>&nbsp;</td>
    </tr>

    <tr>
        <td height="50" style="border-top:1px solid #000; border-bottom:1px solid #000;padding-top:10px;">
            <form><input type="button" value=" Print this page "
                         onclick="window.print();return false;"/></form>
        </td>
    </tr>
</table></body>
</html>'

}
$cookies = []
$values = [
	(int) 0 => 'text/html; charset=UTF-8'
]
$name = 'Content-Type'
$first = true
$value = 'text/html; charset=UTF-8'
header - [internal], line ??
Cake\Http\ResponseEmitter::emitHeaders() - CORE/src/Http/ResponseEmitter.php, line 181
Cake\Http\ResponseEmitter::emit() - CORE/src/Http/ResponseEmitter.php, line 55
Cake\Http\Server::emit() - CORE/src/Http/Server.php, line 141
[main] - ROOT/webroot/index.php, line 39

<head>

    <link rel="canonical" href="<?php echo Configure::read('SITE_URL'); ?><?php echo $urlPrefix;?><?php echo $article_current->category->slug; ?>/<?php echo $article_current->seo_url; ?>.html"/>

    <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"/>

$viewFile = '/home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp'
$dataForView = [
	'article_current' => object(App\Model\Entity\Article) {

		'id' => (int) 28797,
		'title' => 'Govt could compromise on Land Bill 2015 -Aditi Phadnis',
		'subheading' => '',
		'description' => '<div align="justify">
-Business Standard<br />
<br />
<em>Even amended version passed by Lok Sabha could be diluted<br />
</em><br />
Reconciled to the fact that it will have no option but to cave in to the diktat of the opposition on the 2015 Land Acquisition Resettlement and Rehabilitation (LARR) Bill in the Rajya Sabha where it is in a minority, the Narendra Modi-led National Democratic Alliance (NDA) government is preparing to virtually abandon its own bill.<br />
<br />
This could cause even more legislative and policy confusion on land acquisition.<br />
<br />
The 2013 LARR was amended and replaced by LARR 2015, to make land acquisition easier for certain categories of projects, to give a boost to industrial activity. The requirement of Social Impact Analysis (SIA) and consent of land losers was waived for this category. Lok Sabha passed LARR 2015 and 44 MPs of the Congress walked out to show they disagreed with the amendments.<br />
<br />
When the Bill came to the Rajya Sabha, it demanded a parliamentary panel to study the bill as even its amended version had been changed substantially by the Lok Sabha. The committee which has 15 BJP members and 15 from other parties, and is headed by MP from Darjeeling, S S Ahluwalia, is likely to give its report on 5 August. Clause-by-clause discussion will begin from Monday.<br />
<br />
According to sources in the committee, most BJP MPs are inexperienced and unschooled about the finer points of law. The proceedings are dominated by former Rural Development Minister and architect of the 2013 law, Jairam Ramesh and former Madhya Pradesh Chief Minister, Digvijay Singh, assisted ably by Trinamool Congress leader Kalyan Bannerjee. The balance of advantage is with the opposition and the BJP MPs are intellectually unable to hold their own.<br />
<br />
The net result is substantial dilution of the LARR 2015 &ndash; even the amended version passed by the Lok Sabha.<br />
<br />
The opposition in the Select Committee, for instance is united that acquired land which is not utilized for three years should be returned to land losers. In the 2015 bill as passed by the Lok Sabha, this period was &ldquo;a period specified for setting up the project or five years, whichever was later&rdquo; (clause 101).<br />
<br />
Some doubts were raised about the word &lsquo;utilization&rsquo; &ndash; should land be deemed to have been utilized if a boundary wall is built? This matter is still under discussion.<br />
<br />
Section 46 of LARR 2015 related to extending rehabilitation and resettlement benefits to land owners in case of purchase of land through private negotiations in excess of 100 acres. The government is ready to scrap this.<br />
<br />
Industry Secretary Amitabh Kant who recently deposed before the committee said that the most contentious issue &ndash; land required for industrial corridors upto 1 km on either side of the road - should be exempt from SIA and Consent clauses as the land (mostly) belonged to Indian Railways any way. He said this should never have been in the LARR legislation in the first place.<br />
<br />
The government might relent and take Industrial corridors out of the purview of the bill.<br />
<br />
In the end however, the general fear is that given the opposition majority in the Rajya Sabha, the LARR bill passed by the upper house may be a deeply diluted version of the government&rsquo;s own 2015 bill. This will leave the government with only two choices &ndash; get the Lok Sabha to ratify the bill as amended by the Rajya Sabha that will be marginally different from the 2013 bill widely perceived as anti-industry; or push for the Lok Sabha version of the LARR 2015 to be passed by the upper house, wait for it to fall and then have it passed in a joint sitting of the two Houses.<br />
<br />
There is a third choice: that the government works on breaking the opposition by isolating the Congress. That doesn&rsquo;t seem politically feasible.<br />
<br />
In the interim, in the absence of central guidance, state governments will be free to acquire land in the manner they think fit.<br />
<br />
Under the 2013 law, only two big parcels of land have been acquired so far: one for a road in Punjab, built primarily to service a hotel owned by the family of Chief Minister Parkash Singh Badal; and one in Odisha. It was to telescope the time taken in acquiring land that the government had pressed for the 2015 amendments. However, recognising the reality that the NDA does not have majority in the Rajya Sabha, Prime Minister Modi had resolved to let state governments take the final call in the matter and make one last effort to take the opposition on board on an amended version of the 2015 legislation. Now it seems even that might not materialise.
</div>',
		'credit_writer' => 'Business Standard, 31 July, 2015, http://www.business-standard.com/article/politics/govt-could-compromise-on-land-bill-2015-115073101352_1.html',
		'article_img' => '',
		'article_img_thumb' => '',
		'status' => (int) 1,
		'show_on_home' => (int) 1,
		'lang' => 'EN',
		'category_id' => (int) 16,
		'tag_keyword' => '',
		'seo_url' => 'govt-could-compromise-on-land-bill-2015-aditi-phadnis-4676850',
		'meta_title' => null,
		'meta_keywords' => null,
		'meta_description' => null,
		'noindex' => (int) 0,
		'publish_date' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenDate) {},
		'most_visit_section_id' => null,
		'article_big_img' => null,
		'liveid' => (int) 4676850,
		'created' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {},
		'modified' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {},
		'edate' => '',
		'tags' => [
			[maximum depth reached]
		],
		'category' => object(App\Model\Entity\Category) {},
		'[new]' => false,
		'[accessible]' => [
			[maximum depth reached]
		],
		'[dirty]' => [[maximum depth reached]],
		'[original]' => [[maximum depth reached]],
		'[virtual]' => [[maximum depth reached]],
		'[hasErrors]' => false,
		'[errors]' => [[maximum depth reached]],
		'[invalid]' => [[maximum depth reached]],
		'[repository]' => 'Articles'
	
	},
	'articleid' => (int) 28797,
	'metaTitle' => 'LATEST NEWS UPDATES | Govt could compromise on Land Bill 2015 -Aditi Phadnis',
	'metaKeywords' => 'Social Impact Assessment,Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Rehabilitation and Resettlement law,Consent,Land Acquisition,Land Acquisition Act,land acquisition and rehabilitation,Land Acquisition Bill,Land Alienation',
	'metaDesc' => '
-Business Standard

Even amended version passed by Lok Sabha could be diluted

Reconciled to the fact that it will have no option but to cave in to the diktat of the opposition on the 2015 Land Acquisition Resettlement and Rehabilitation (LARR) Bill...',
	'disp' => '<div align="justify">-Business Standard<br /><br /><em>Even amended version passed by Lok Sabha could be diluted<br /></em><br />Reconciled to the fact that it will have no option but to cave in to the diktat of the opposition on the 2015 Land Acquisition Resettlement and Rehabilitation (LARR) Bill in the Rajya Sabha where it is in a minority, the Narendra Modi-led National Democratic Alliance (NDA) government is preparing to virtually abandon its own bill.<br /><br />This could cause even more legislative and policy confusion on land acquisition.<br /><br />The 2013 LARR was amended and replaced by LARR 2015, to make land acquisition easier for certain categories of projects, to give a boost to industrial activity. The requirement of Social Impact Analysis (SIA) and consent of land losers was waived for this category. Lok Sabha passed LARR 2015 and 44 MPs of the Congress walked out to show they disagreed with the amendments.<br /><br />When the Bill came to the Rajya Sabha, it demanded a parliamentary panel to study the bill as even its amended version had been changed substantially by the Lok Sabha. The committee which has 15 BJP members and 15 from other parties, and is headed by MP from Darjeeling, S S Ahluwalia, is likely to give its report on 5 August. Clause-by-clause discussion will begin from Monday.<br /><br />According to sources in the committee, most BJP MPs are inexperienced and unschooled about the finer points of law. The proceedings are dominated by former Rural Development Minister and architect of the 2013 law, Jairam Ramesh and former Madhya Pradesh Chief Minister, Digvijay Singh, assisted ably by Trinamool Congress leader Kalyan Bannerjee. The balance of advantage is with the opposition and the BJP MPs are intellectually unable to hold their own.<br /><br />The net result is substantial dilution of the LARR 2015 &ndash; even the amended version passed by the Lok Sabha.<br /><br />The opposition in the Select Committee, for instance is united that acquired land which is not utilized for three years should be returned to land losers. In the 2015 bill as passed by the Lok Sabha, this period was &ldquo;a period specified for setting up the project or five years, whichever was later&rdquo; (clause 101).<br /><br />Some doubts were raised about the word &lsquo;utilization&rsquo; &ndash; should land be deemed to have been utilized if a boundary wall is built? This matter is still under discussion.<br /><br />Section 46 of LARR 2015 related to extending rehabilitation and resettlement benefits to land owners in case of purchase of land through private negotiations in excess of 100 acres. The government is ready to scrap this.<br /><br />Industry Secretary Amitabh Kant who recently deposed before the committee said that the most contentious issue &ndash; land required for industrial corridors upto 1 km on either side of the road - should be exempt from SIA and Consent clauses as the land (mostly) belonged to Indian Railways any way. He said this should never have been in the LARR legislation in the first place.<br /><br />The government might relent and take Industrial corridors out of the purview of the bill.<br /><br />In the end however, the general fear is that given the opposition majority in the Rajya Sabha, the LARR bill passed by the upper house may be a deeply diluted version of the government&rsquo;s own 2015 bill. This will leave the government with only two choices &ndash; get the Lok Sabha to ratify the bill as amended by the Rajya Sabha that will be marginally different from the 2013 bill widely perceived as anti-industry; or push for the Lok Sabha version of the LARR 2015 to be passed by the upper house, wait for it to fall and then have it passed in a joint sitting of the two Houses.<br /><br />There is a third choice: that the government works on breaking the opposition by isolating the Congress. That doesn&rsquo;t seem politically feasible.<br /><br />In the interim, in the absence of central guidance, state governments will be free to acquire land in the manner they think fit.<br /><br />Under the 2013 law, only two big parcels of land have been acquired so far: one for a road in Punjab, built primarily to service a hotel owned by the family of Chief Minister Parkash Singh Badal; and one in Odisha. It was to telescope the time taken in acquiring land that the government had pressed for the 2015 amendments. However, recognising the reality that the NDA does not have majority in the Rajya Sabha, Prime Minister Modi had resolved to let state governments take the final call in the matter and make one last effort to take the opposition on board on an amended version of the 2015 legislation. Now it seems even that might not materialise.</div>',
	'lang' => 'English',
	'SITE_URL' => 'https://im4change.in/',
	'site_title' => 'im4change',
	'adminprix' => 'admin'
]
$article_current = object(App\Model\Entity\Article) {

	'id' => (int) 28797,
	'title' => 'Govt could compromise on Land Bill 2015 -Aditi Phadnis',
	'subheading' => '',
	'description' => '<div align="justify">
-Business Standard<br />
<br />
<em>Even amended version passed by Lok Sabha could be diluted<br />
</em><br />
Reconciled to the fact that it will have no option but to cave in to the diktat of the opposition on the 2015 Land Acquisition Resettlement and Rehabilitation (LARR) Bill in the Rajya Sabha where it is in a minority, the Narendra Modi-led National Democratic Alliance (NDA) government is preparing to virtually abandon its own bill.<br />
<br />
This could cause even more legislative and policy confusion on land acquisition.<br />
<br />
The 2013 LARR was amended and replaced by LARR 2015, to make land acquisition easier for certain categories of projects, to give a boost to industrial activity. The requirement of Social Impact Analysis (SIA) and consent of land losers was waived for this category. Lok Sabha passed LARR 2015 and 44 MPs of the Congress walked out to show they disagreed with the amendments.<br />
<br />
When the Bill came to the Rajya Sabha, it demanded a parliamentary panel to study the bill as even its amended version had been changed substantially by the Lok Sabha. The committee which has 15 BJP members and 15 from other parties, and is headed by MP from Darjeeling, S S Ahluwalia, is likely to give its report on 5 August. Clause-by-clause discussion will begin from Monday.<br />
<br />
According to sources in the committee, most BJP MPs are inexperienced and unschooled about the finer points of law. The proceedings are dominated by former Rural Development Minister and architect of the 2013 law, Jairam Ramesh and former Madhya Pradesh Chief Minister, Digvijay Singh, assisted ably by Trinamool Congress leader Kalyan Bannerjee. The balance of advantage is with the opposition and the BJP MPs are intellectually unable to hold their own.<br />
<br />
The net result is substantial dilution of the LARR 2015 &ndash; even the amended version passed by the Lok Sabha.<br />
<br />
The opposition in the Select Committee, for instance is united that acquired land which is not utilized for three years should be returned to land losers. In the 2015 bill as passed by the Lok Sabha, this period was &ldquo;a period specified for setting up the project or five years, whichever was later&rdquo; (clause 101).<br />
<br />
Some doubts were raised about the word &lsquo;utilization&rsquo; &ndash; should land be deemed to have been utilized if a boundary wall is built? This matter is still under discussion.<br />
<br />
Section 46 of LARR 2015 related to extending rehabilitation and resettlement benefits to land owners in case of purchase of land through private negotiations in excess of 100 acres. The government is ready to scrap this.<br />
<br />
Industry Secretary Amitabh Kant who recently deposed before the committee said that the most contentious issue &ndash; land required for industrial corridors upto 1 km on either side of the road - should be exempt from SIA and Consent clauses as the land (mostly) belonged to Indian Railways any way. He said this should never have been in the LARR legislation in the first place.<br />
<br />
The government might relent and take Industrial corridors out of the purview of the bill.<br />
<br />
In the end however, the general fear is that given the opposition majority in the Rajya Sabha, the LARR bill passed by the upper house may be a deeply diluted version of the government&rsquo;s own 2015 bill. This will leave the government with only two choices &ndash; get the Lok Sabha to ratify the bill as amended by the Rajya Sabha that will be marginally different from the 2013 bill widely perceived as anti-industry; or push for the Lok Sabha version of the LARR 2015 to be passed by the upper house, wait for it to fall and then have it passed in a joint sitting of the two Houses.<br />
<br />
There is a third choice: that the government works on breaking the opposition by isolating the Congress. That doesn&rsquo;t seem politically feasible.<br />
<br />
In the interim, in the absence of central guidance, state governments will be free to acquire land in the manner they think fit.<br />
<br />
Under the 2013 law, only two big parcels of land have been acquired so far: one for a road in Punjab, built primarily to service a hotel owned by the family of Chief Minister Parkash Singh Badal; and one in Odisha. It was to telescope the time taken in acquiring land that the government had pressed for the 2015 amendments. However, recognising the reality that the NDA does not have majority in the Rajya Sabha, Prime Minister Modi had resolved to let state governments take the final call in the matter and make one last effort to take the opposition on board on an amended version of the 2015 legislation. Now it seems even that might not materialise.
</div>',
	'credit_writer' => 'Business Standard, 31 July, 2015, http://www.business-standard.com/article/politics/govt-could-compromise-on-land-bill-2015-115073101352_1.html',
	'article_img' => '',
	'article_img_thumb' => '',
	'status' => (int) 1,
	'show_on_home' => (int) 1,
	'lang' => 'EN',
	'category_id' => (int) 16,
	'tag_keyword' => '',
	'seo_url' => 'govt-could-compromise-on-land-bill-2015-aditi-phadnis-4676850',
	'meta_title' => null,
	'meta_keywords' => null,
	'meta_description' => null,
	'noindex' => (int) 0,
	'publish_date' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenDate) {},
	'most_visit_section_id' => null,
	'article_big_img' => null,
	'liveid' => (int) 4676850,
	'created' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {},
	'modified' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {},
	'edate' => '',
	'tags' => [
		(int) 0 => object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {},
		(int) 1 => object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {},
		(int) 2 => object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {},
		(int) 3 => object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {},
		(int) 4 => object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {},
		(int) 5 => object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {},
		(int) 6 => object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {},
		(int) 7 => object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {}
	],
	'category' => object(App\Model\Entity\Category) {},
	'[new]' => false,
	'[accessible]' => [
		'*' => true,
		'id' => false
	],
	'[dirty]' => [],
	'[original]' => [],
	'[virtual]' => [],
	'[hasErrors]' => false,
	'[errors]' => [],
	'[invalid]' => [],
	'[repository]' => 'Articles'

}
$articleid = (int) 28797
$metaTitle = 'LATEST NEWS UPDATES | Govt could compromise on Land Bill 2015 -Aditi Phadnis'
$metaKeywords = 'Social Impact Assessment,Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Rehabilitation and Resettlement law,Consent,Land Acquisition,Land Acquisition Act,land acquisition and rehabilitation,Land Acquisition Bill,Land Alienation'
$metaDesc = '
-Business Standard

Even amended version passed by Lok Sabha could be diluted

Reconciled to the fact that it will have no option but to cave in to the diktat of the opposition on the 2015 Land Acquisition Resettlement and Rehabilitation (LARR) Bill...'
$disp = '<div align="justify">-Business Standard<br /><br /><em>Even amended version passed by Lok Sabha could be diluted<br /></em><br />Reconciled to the fact that it will have no option but to cave in to the diktat of the opposition on the 2015 Land Acquisition Resettlement and Rehabilitation (LARR) Bill in the Rajya Sabha where it is in a minority, the Narendra Modi-led National Democratic Alliance (NDA) government is preparing to virtually abandon its own bill.<br /><br />This could cause even more legislative and policy confusion on land acquisition.<br /><br />The 2013 LARR was amended and replaced by LARR 2015, to make land acquisition easier for certain categories of projects, to give a boost to industrial activity. The requirement of Social Impact Analysis (SIA) and consent of land losers was waived for this category. Lok Sabha passed LARR 2015 and 44 MPs of the Congress walked out to show they disagreed with the amendments.<br /><br />When the Bill came to the Rajya Sabha, it demanded a parliamentary panel to study the bill as even its amended version had been changed substantially by the Lok Sabha. The committee which has 15 BJP members and 15 from other parties, and is headed by MP from Darjeeling, S S Ahluwalia, is likely to give its report on 5 August. Clause-by-clause discussion will begin from Monday.<br /><br />According to sources in the committee, most BJP MPs are inexperienced and unschooled about the finer points of law. The proceedings are dominated by former Rural Development Minister and architect of the 2013 law, Jairam Ramesh and former Madhya Pradesh Chief Minister, Digvijay Singh, assisted ably by Trinamool Congress leader Kalyan Bannerjee. The balance of advantage is with the opposition and the BJP MPs are intellectually unable to hold their own.<br /><br />The net result is substantial dilution of the LARR 2015 &ndash; even the amended version passed by the Lok Sabha.<br /><br />The opposition in the Select Committee, for instance is united that acquired land which is not utilized for three years should be returned to land losers. In the 2015 bill as passed by the Lok Sabha, this period was &ldquo;a period specified for setting up the project or five years, whichever was later&rdquo; (clause 101).<br /><br />Some doubts were raised about the word &lsquo;utilization&rsquo; &ndash; should land be deemed to have been utilized if a boundary wall is built? This matter is still under discussion.<br /><br />Section 46 of LARR 2015 related to extending rehabilitation and resettlement benefits to land owners in case of purchase of land through private negotiations in excess of 100 acres. The government is ready to scrap this.<br /><br />Industry Secretary Amitabh Kant who recently deposed before the committee said that the most contentious issue &ndash; land required for industrial corridors upto 1 km on either side of the road - should be exempt from SIA and Consent clauses as the land (mostly) belonged to Indian Railways any way. He said this should never have been in the LARR legislation in the first place.<br /><br />The government might relent and take Industrial corridors out of the purview of the bill.<br /><br />In the end however, the general fear is that given the opposition majority in the Rajya Sabha, the LARR bill passed by the upper house may be a deeply diluted version of the government&rsquo;s own 2015 bill. This will leave the government with only two choices &ndash; get the Lok Sabha to ratify the bill as amended by the Rajya Sabha that will be marginally different from the 2013 bill widely perceived as anti-industry; or push for the Lok Sabha version of the LARR 2015 to be passed by the upper house, wait for it to fall and then have it passed in a joint sitting of the two Houses.<br /><br />There is a third choice: that the government works on breaking the opposition by isolating the Congress. That doesn&rsquo;t seem politically feasible.<br /><br />In the interim, in the absence of central guidance, state governments will be free to acquire land in the manner they think fit.<br /><br />Under the 2013 law, only two big parcels of land have been acquired so far: one for a road in Punjab, built primarily to service a hotel owned by the family of Chief Minister Parkash Singh Badal; and one in Odisha. It was to telescope the time taken in acquiring land that the government had pressed for the 2015 amendments. However, recognising the reality that the NDA does not have majority in the Rajya Sabha, Prime Minister Modi had resolved to let state governments take the final call in the matter and make one last effort to take the opposition on board on an amended version of the 2015 legislation. Now it seems even that might not materialise.</div>'
$lang = 'English'
$SITE_URL = 'https://im4change.in/'
$site_title = 'im4change'
$adminprix = 'admin'

include - APP/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp, line 8
Cake\View\View::_evaluate() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 1413
Cake\View\View::_render() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 1374
Cake\View\View::renderLayout() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 927
Cake\View\View::render() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 885
Cake\Controller\Controller::render() - CORE/src/Controller/Controller.php, line 791
Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::_invoke() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 126
Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::dispatch() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 94
Cake\Http\BaseApplication::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/BaseApplication.php, line 235
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Routing\Middleware\RoutingMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/RoutingMiddleware.php, line 162
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Routing\Middleware\AssetMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/AssetMiddleware.php, line 88
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Error\Middleware\ErrorHandlerMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Error/Middleware/ErrorHandlerMiddleware.php, line 96
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Http\Runner::run() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 51

Govt could compromise on Land Bill 2015 -Aditi Phadnis

-Business Standard Even amended version passed by Lok Sabha could be diluted Reconciled to the fact that it will have no option but to cave in to the diktat of the opposition on the 2015 Land Acquisition Resettlement and Rehabilitation (LARR) Bill in the Rajya Sabha where it is in a minority, the Narendra Modi-led National Democratic Alliance (NDA) government is preparing to virtually abandon its own bill. This could cause even more legislative and policy confusion on land acquisition. The 2013 LARR was amended and replaced by LARR 2015, to make land acquisition easier for certain categories of projects, to give a boost to industrial activity. The requirement of Social Impact Analysis (SIA) and consent of land losers was waived for this category. Lok Sabha passed LARR 2015 and 44 MPs of the Congress walked out to show they disagreed with the amendments. When the Bill came to the Rajya Sabha, it demanded a parliamentary panel to study the bill as even its amended version had been changed substantially by the Lok Sabha. The committee which has 15 BJP members and 15 from other parties, and is headed by MP from Darjeeling, S S Ahluwalia, is likely to give its report on 5 August. Clause-by-clause discussion will begin from Monday. According to sources in the committee, most BJP MPs are inexperienced and unschooled about the finer points of law. The proceedings are dominated by former Rural Development Minister and architect of the 2013 law, Jairam Ramesh and former Madhya Pradesh Chief Minister, Digvijay Singh, assisted ably by Trinamool Congress leader Kalyan Bannerjee. The balance of advantage is with the opposition and the BJP MPs are intellectually unable to hold their own. The net result is substantial dilution of the LARR 2015 – even the amended version passed by the Lok Sabha. The opposition in the Select Committee, for instance is united that acquired land which is not utilized for three years should be returned to land losers. In the 2015 bill as passed by the Lok Sabha, this period was “a period specified for setting up the project or five years, whichever was later” (clause 101). Some doubts were raised about the word ‘utilization’ – should land be deemed to have been utilized if a boundary wall is built? This matter is still under discussion. Section 46 of LARR 2015 related to extending rehabilitation and resettlement benefits to land owners in case of purchase of land through private negotiations in excess of 100 acres. The government is ready to scrap this. Industry Secretary Amitabh Kant who recently deposed before the committee said that the most contentious issue – land required for industrial corridors upto 1 km on either side of the road - should be exempt from SIA and Consent clauses as the land (mostly) belonged to Indian Railways any way. He said this should never have been in the LARR legislation in the first place. The government might relent and take Industrial corridors out of the purview of the bill. In the end however, the general fear is that given the opposition majority in the Rajya Sabha, the LARR bill passed by the upper house may be a deeply diluted version of the government’s own 2015 bill. This will leave the government with only two choices – get the Lok Sabha to ratify the bill as amended by the Rajya Sabha that will be marginally different from the 2013 bill widely perceived as anti-industry; or push for the Lok Sabha version of the LARR 2015 to be passed by the upper house, wait for it to fall and then have it passed in a joint sitting of the two Houses. There is a third choice: that the government works on breaking the opposition by isolating the Congress. That doesn’t seem politically feasible. In the interim, in the absence of central guidance, state governments will be free to acquire land in the manner they think fit. Under the 2013 law, only two big parcels of land have been acquired so far: one for a road in Punjab, built primarily to service a hotel owned by the family of Chief Minister Parkash Singh Badal; and one in Odisha. It was to telescope the time taken in acquiring land that the government had pressed for the 2015 amendments. However, recognising the reality that the NDA does not have majority in the Rajya Sabha, Prime Minister Modi had resolved to let state governments take the final call in the matter and make one last effort to take the opposition on board on an amended version of the 2015 legislation. Now it seems even that might not materialise.