Bill amended to suit corporates
DC discusses the recent amendments to Land Acquisition Act, 2014, and their effects
after a debate in Parliament just nine months before this amendment ordinance. The present ordinance was introduced in order to help corporate sharks.
The Land Acquisition Act, 2013 came into force in the UPA regime. The Act clearly said that land will be acquired only with the consent of farmers.
It had also clarified that people displaced due to the acquisition will not lose anything. In fact, their socio-economic condition will improve.
The 2013 Act had put an end to forcible acquisition, whereas the present ordinance will forcibly displace either farmers or tribals from their land.
The Act of 2013 clearly said that nobody should be displaced from their land until and unless due compensation is completely paid and displaced people are rehabilitated.
The previous Act mandated that apart from farmers, tenant farmers, agricultural labourers, artisans and other dependents on the particular piece of land, will also get compensation. The Act was very clear that a particular piece of land will be acquired only after thorough enquiry to confirm that the acquisition is necessary, and any alternative land cannot be acquired etc.
Land Acquisition Act, 2013 also categorically stated that land can be acquired only after providing safeguards to farmers and tribals enshrined in the Panchayat Act and Forest Rights Act.
If anybody does not use the acquired land for the said purpose, that land must be returned to its previous owner. If at all that land is sold to a third party and land value is increased, 40 per cent share is to be given to the farmer. According to the Act, if the lands of farmers are to be acquired, consent of 80 per cent of the total number of farmers giving up land was required.
Chapter 2 of the Act also said that social impact assessment should be made. It included questions like — Is the acquisition necessary for public purpose? How many families will be impacted? How much land is required? Whether any alternative land can be acquired, and the amount of money required for that?
In the rehabilitation programme, roads, drainage, drinking water, water for cattle, trees, post offices, godowns, electricity, places of worship and tribal welfare centres etc. were listed as basic infrastructure to be provided to the rehabilitated people.
In Chapter 3, it was pointed out that multicrop cultivable land should not be acquired. If at all such land is to be acquired, alternative land must be provided and the necessary amount for the development of infrastructure must be deposited with the government.
But, unmindful of the negative impact it is going to create, the NDA government is not interested in abandoning the objectionable amendments it wants to bring. It only seems interested in making few minor changes which can’t check the negative impact.
Incidentally, both TRS government in Telangana and TD government in AP are not interested to press for major changes as they want to sail with the NDA, in order to avoid several issues in land acquisition for their projects in their respective states.