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: 150
 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]
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: 151
 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]
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]
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]
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]
LATEST NEWS UPDATES | Subverting the Land Acquisition Act, 2013 -Santosh Verma

Subverting the Land Acquisition Act, 2013 -Santosh Verma

Share this article Share this article
published Published on Sep 13, 2015   modified Modified on Sep 13, 2015
-Economic and Political Weekly

After coming to power in 2014, the National Democratic Alliance government took several measures to dilute the pro-poor provisions of the Land Acquisition Act of 2013. Though it has backed down, several questions remain over the way the Modi government has dealt with the issue of land acquisition.

Santosh Verma (santosh.econ@gmail.com) is at the Council for Social Development, New Delhi.

Land acquisition—by private corporations or the state—has raised vital questions for India, where half of the workforce is involved in agricultural work for livelihood. There have been bitter debates in academia, and protests from agricultural communities on the question of land. As the processes leading to the dispossession of farmers’ lands gathered momentum, protests intensified in different parts of the country. They forced the United Progressive Alliance (UPA) government at the centre to enact the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement (LARR) Act, 2013. Though, this act, passed by the Parliament, was termed pro-people, certain issues remained unresolved. For example, the fear of arbitrary valuation of the market price of land acquired was not addressed.

However, the National Democratic Alliance (NDA) government has virtually nullified this act. It passed a LARR Ordinance on 29 December 2014. Several amendments diluting the criterion for land acquisitions were included in the ordinance, on grounds that the LARR Act, 2013 was complicated and anti-development (Jaitley 2015).

The government’s haste in passing the LARR Ordinance and the continuous public protests against land acquisitions raise several questions which need urgent answers, even though the amendments have lapsed. Why are there such strong protests against land acquisitions? Why are most protests only against land acquisitions for private purposes? How would families be affected by loss of land and livelihood? Is land acquisition at such a large scale necessary for economic development?

The 48th round of the National Sample Survey Office (NSSO) survey (Land and Livestock Survey, 1992) reported that 69.24% of the households were that of the landless, and marginal and small farmers. In the NSSO’s 70th round (2012) this increased to 92.84%. The survey suggests that there was a massive increase in the proportion of landless, marginal and small farmer households. It also reports that landholdings have fragmented even more.

The NDA ordinance to amend the LARR Act 2013 to make the process of land acquisition easier should be seen in this context. It did so without consideration for the affected families and their livelihoods. This article is a brief note on land acquisition acts in India, and the implications of the attempted amendments to the LARR Act 2013, which have been for now, at best, postponed and left to politics in individual states.

Historical Context

The first piece of legislation in respect of acquisition of land was the Bengal Regulation of 1824. Many amendments were promulgated at various times for Madras, Bombay and for other regions under British India. Eventually, a Land Acquisition Act was passed in 1894; this piece of legislation continued with several amendments even after independence. The Land Acquisition Act of 1894 specifically mentioned that the acquisition of land would take place for public purposes where the “State” (central, provincial or local, societies registered under the Societies Registration Act 1860 and the cooperative societies established under the Cooperative Societies Act) would acquire land from government agencies or individual owners. The act of 1894 defined public purpose for land acquisition as those pertaining to the establishment of educational institutions, rural planning, housing, establishment of government offices, health or slum clearance schemes.

The Land Acquisition Act 1894 went through many amendments: in 1914, 1919, 1920, 1921, 1923, 1933, 1938, 1951, 1984 and 2007. But even after several amendments, its original nature remained intact. Land was leased and purchased by successive governments as “eminent domain.” Governments also purchased land from individuals and farmers to fulfil private demands for land. In the two and a half decades after neo-liberal and market reforms were initiated, land acquisitions for public and private purposes have increased manifold, drawing criticisms and protests across the country. Such public furore forced the UPA-II government to pass a new land acquisition act—the LARR, 2013 which replaced the century-old 1894 act.

The LARR Act 2013 defined different purposes for which land could be acquired, namely, “public purposes,” “public private partnership” (PPP) purposes, and “private purposes.” The act emphasised the growing need of land for industrialisation and urbanisation among other requirements. It also emphasised PPPs, and talked of land acquisition on a large scale for activities of private companies (Singh 2012). There are, however, several examples in the distant past when government had acquired land under the “emergency clause”1 for the private companies in India. There were several enactments for land acquisition for private purposes under the Special Economic Zones (SEZ) Act 2005. These varied from centre to states (GoI 2010). The LARR Act categorically highlighted the “consent clause” according to which the land acquisition for PPP projects would take place with the consent of 70% of the affected families, and the land acquisition for the private companies would take place only with the consent of 80% of the affected families. The act prohibited acquisition of lands which were irrigated and multi-crop—acquisition of such land was allowed only under “exceptional circumstances.”2 But the act emphasised that an equivalent piece of land had to be developed for agricultural activities to enhance the food security in the country.

Industry Criticism

The LARR Act, 2013 was viewed as a rights-based act; it was seen as more “competent,” “consultative” and “participatory.” It also addressed the major drawbacks of 1894 act. The “consent clause” talked of reinstating the question of housing, livelihood-based rights and the act also decreed proper compensation, rehabilitation and resettlement of communities whose land was taken for commercial purposes. The introduction of social impact assessment (SIA), sharing of capital gains over the period of the first 10 years with the communities whose land was being acquired, and the measure restriction acquisition to not more than 5% of the land in multi-crop districts and 10% of the land in single-crop districts provided security to the affected communities. There were rehabilitation and resettlement measures. The act also mentioned that acquisition of more than 100 acres in rural areas and 50 acres in urban areas by private negotiation should take place through proper administrative channels. These measures of the LARR Act drew criticisms from the industry, big corporate houses and from some sections of the academia. The legislation was criticised for including complex procedures and fixing of arbitrary prices of land. There were fears of unending litigations. There were also fears that interruptions in land acquisition would hamper the demand for land and several industrial projects would come to a halt (Kumar and Kumar 2013).

The formation of the new government at the centre in May 2014 led to speculation about the probable amendments in the LARR Act, 2013, due to corporate lobbying against the act. The industry and corporate houses continuously pressurised the government to come with a new land acquisition legislation. Finally, the government came up with a LARR Ordinance modifying the LARR Act, 2013—and providing the private sector a major benefit.

Section 40 of the act, the “urgency clause,” which allowed compulsory acquisition by the government, was widened. The urgency clause initially was limited to defence and natural calamities, but under Section 10A of the ordinance, it was expanded to include rural infrastructure, affordable housing, industrial corridors, infrastructure development and housing for the poor. The LARR Act 2013 required SIA, “determination of public purpose,” “consent clause,” and “public hearing” for every kind of land acquisition. The LARR Ordinance abolished all these. The state could act as “eminent domain” using the sovereign powers it enjoyed under the old colonial act of 1894 to acquire land arbitrarily. Besides, 13 new areas, which were excluded from the 2013 act, were added to the ordinance. Some of these were atomic energy, railways, electricity, national highways and metro rail. If the land was acquired for these purposes, the affected families were to be provided the same compensation and rehabilitation as stipulated in the LARR Act, 2013.

Recent Developments

Since January 2015, the LARR Ordinance has been promulgated three times by the NDA government amidst massive protests from different independent farmer groups, social activists and opposition parties—inside and outside the Parliament. The Lok Sabha, where NDA government has full majority, passed a bill on 10 March 2015 to amend the LARR Act, 2013. The bill exempted five categories of projects (defence, rural infrastructure, affordable housing, industrial corridors up to 1 km on either side of the road) from the consent clause and the SIA provisions of the 2013 act.

While the LARR Act, 2013 prohibited acquisition of land for private hospitals and private educational institutions, the bill passed by the Lok Sabha allows such acquisition. Opposition parties stalled the bill in the Rajya Sabha, arguing that this piece of legislation would deepen the agrarian crisis. A Joint Parliamentary Committee (JPC) has been set up for further deliberations; it will submit its report in the Parliament’s winter session. In its full sitting, the NITI Aayog, on 14 July 2015, discussed the Land Ordinance where chief ministers of a few states (Punjab, Haryana and Maharashtra) demanded permission to frame their own laws if the government fails to get the bill approved in the Parliament. Playing cleverly on such demands, the cabinet has decided to add a provision permitting the states to pass their own laws. The provision will also let states decide whether they want the consent clause and SIA in their laws before acquiring land from farmers.

Consequences of Acquisition

Till 5 December 2014, 491 SEZs had been approved; they were allotted 51,055 hectares of land. But only 40% of the total SEZs were operational in spite of large-scale land acquisition (Singh 2012). Removal of the consent clause and SIA will provide unrestricted bargaining power to government authorities and to the private companies. It will work against the interests of rural communities. The abolition of consent clause will lead to further complications as land will be acquired for private projects like SEZs, tourism, health. All this will accentuate social unrest.

Rehabilitation of affected families has left much to be desired in the past and compensation has been inadequate. This has led to several protests. For example, there have been peoples’ movements against the Reliance SEZ in Navi Mumbai, Sampeta in Andhra Pradesh, Singur and Nandigram in West Bengal, Dadri in Uttar Pradesh, Jaitapur in Maharashtra, Mehsana and Ahmedabad in Gujarat, Jagatsinghpur District in Odisha, Koodankulam nuclear power project in Tamil Nadu, Katni in Madhya Pradesh, Keredari (Hazaribagh) and Chatra in Jharkhand. There were also cases when land acquired for PPP projects was transferred to private corporate houses for residential and commercial uses, undermining the very purpose of the acquisition.

In the absence of social security, land is the most reliable resource of subsistence. But the ongoing agrarian distress has forced many in the farming community to leave agriculture and join the ranks of migrants searching for work in urban areas. Forced land acquisition, in a situation of inadequate social security and very few alternate employment options will only intensify distress, conflicts, social unrest and violent protests.

Concluding Remarks

Land is needed for industrialisation, but the central concern of every industrial development policy must be the welfare of people—and not profit. The LAAR Act of 2013 provided a say to the affected families. The LARR Ordinance was a step back and met with severe opposition. Now, the government has decided to let the ordinance die its own death. It will allow states to enact their own land acquisition acts to acquire land. However, the government has created uncertainty and it is not clear that if consent clauses, SIAs, and other pro-farmer measures to ensure the necessary democratic space for affected landowner households will be part of the state land acquisition acts—if they frame such pieces of legislation.

1 Under the emergency clause the governments can acquire land only for the benefit of the public directly, for example, housing for the poor or workers, establishing schools and hospitals, etc. But, there are several examples when government used this clause to acquire land for the private companies.

2 The “exceptional circumstances” under which the irrigated multi-cropped land would be acquired are for the construction of railways, highways or major district roads, irrigation canals and power lines or in alike situations.

References

Government of India (1894): “The Land Acquisition Act, 1894,” available on http://bombayhighcourt.nic.in/libweb/acts/1894.01.pdf

— (2010): “Special Economic Zone Rules 2006,” Government of India, New Delhi.

— (2013): “Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013,” available on http://dolr.nic.in/dolr/downloads/pdfs/Act_Land_Acqusiition_2013.pdf

Jaitley, Arun (2015): “Amendments to the Land Acquisition Law–the Real Picture,” http://www.bjp.org/en/media-resources/press-releases/article-shri-arun-j... acquisition-law-the-real-picture

Kumar, Rajiv and Prashant Kumar (2013): “Land Bill a Mortal Blow to India’s Modernisation”, Financial Express, 5 September, available at http://archive.financialexpress.com/news/land-bill-a-mortal-blow-to-indi....

Singh, Ram (2012): “Inefficiency and Abuse of Compulsory Land Acquisition: An Inquiry into the Way Forward,” Economic & Political Weekly, Vol XLVII, No 19, 12 May.

Economic and Political Weekly, Vol-L, No. 37, September 12, 2015, http://www.epw.in/commentary/subverting-land-acquisition-act-2013.html


Related Articles

 

Write Comments

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*

Video Archives

Archives

Im4Change.org हिंदी वेबसाइट का परिचय. Short Video on im4change.org...

Im4Change.org हिंदी वेबसाइट का परिचय. Short Video on im4change.org...

"Session 1: Scope of IDEA and AgriStack" in Exploring...

"Session 2: Farmer Centric Digitalisation in Agriculture" in Exploring...

"Session 3: Future of Digitalisation in Agriculture" in Exploring...

Objectives | About Us | Workshops | Disclaimer
share on Facebook
Twitter
RSS
Feedback
Read Later

Contact Form

Please enter security code
      Close