Violence, Protests and Controversies have always Surrounded Land Acquisition in India. The Latest spate of Violent Clashes at Bhatta-Parsaul in UP over Acquisition of Farmers’ land has only brought to fore The Urgent need for Amendments to The Existing Archaic law.
George Bernard Shaw once wrote: “There is no love sincerer than the love of food”. He was an Irish. Good for him. Had he been an Indian, he would have probably ended the first Act of his play, Man and Superman (1903), with the line “There is no love sincerer than the love of land.” Why? Of course, the law that was enacted less than a decade before he penned down the play, would have given him some food for thought. Call it ‘The Land Acquisition Act’, which was carved out on stone literally, by the British in 1894, with the purpose of compulsory acquisition of privately held property or land by the State for ‘public purpose’. Post-independence, the Act was adopted by the Indian government as a tool to grab land. Though various amendments were introduced to the original script of the Act from time to time, the administrative procedures and the parameters dealing with determining the compensation which is to be paid to those displaced remains almost the same. Quite almost, proving how the Indian lawmakers have been quite hostile to innovation – at least in this regard. Expectedly, over time, the archaic Act has become a tool for exploitation of land owners and farmers. And it has all happened behind the facade of a convenient-yet-cosmopolitan scenario of economic development.
The existing Land Acquisition Act gives the government the right to acquire private land without the consent of the land owners if the land is acquired for “public purpose” projects, such as the development of towns and village sites, building of schools, hospitals and housing. Ironically, it is this controversial clause in the Act, which has been misused time and again for forceful acquisition and has also led to the maximum number of protests over land acquisition. Land grabbing is what it means, whether you are in Kashmir or in Uttar Pradesh. When it comes to land issues, the issue is, in India, it is vulnerable to local politics. Take the case of UP, where the latest aggravation in Bhatta-Parsaul villages in Greater Noida has turned the otherwise neglected area into a political battleground, with all major political parties eyeing for their share of limelight. Over 15,000 hectare of land have been acquired in the Greater Noida region over the last 20 years, using a controversial clause in the Land Acquisition Act. The clause empowers governments to acquire land without giving landowners or others the right to “a hearing”. Under the Act, governments which want to acquire land, must give any person affected by the acquisition, a right to make objections. In certain cases, however, where land is needed urgently, the government can skip the potentially time-consuming process of hearings, and acquire the land immediately after issuing a notification. This has been a key provision that the UP government has used for land acquisitions for years. Call it common sense, but it isn’t hard to guess that this ‘urgency’ clause to acquire land has been used as conveniently as a tube well, by local governments across the country, to speed up an otherwise slow process of land acquisition. That too, without much cost and crackle.
“In the last twenty years, almost all the land acquired by the government in Greater Noida has been done through the use of section 17 (the urgency clause),” says Akhilesh Singh, Deputy Chief Executive Officer of the Greater Noida Authority to B&E. Since mid-April, courts have struck down the UP government’s acquisition of a total of 433 hectare of land acquired through such means in Greater Noida. Many similar cases are pending in courts.
The existing Land Acquisition Act gives the government the right to acquire private land without the consent of the land owners if the land is acquired for “public purpose” projects, such as the development of towns and village sites, building of schools, hospitals and housing. Ironically, it is this controversial clause in the Act, which has been misused time and again for forceful acquisition and has also led to the maximum number of protests over land acquisition. Land grabbing is what it means, whether you are in Kashmir or in Uttar Pradesh. When it comes to land issues, the issue is, in India, it is vulnerable to local politics. Take the case of UP, where the latest aggravation in Bhatta-Parsaul villages in Greater Noida has turned the otherwise neglected area into a political battleground, with all major political parties eyeing for their share of limelight. Over 15,000 hectare of land have been acquired in the Greater Noida region over the last 20 years, using a controversial clause in the Land Acquisition Act. The clause empowers governments to acquire land without giving landowners or others the right to “a hearing”. Under the Act, governments which want to acquire land, must give any person affected by the acquisition, a right to make objections. In certain cases, however, where land is needed urgently, the government can skip the potentially time-consuming process of hearings, and acquire the land immediately after issuing a notification. This has been a key provision that the UP government has used for land acquisitions for years. Call it common sense, but it isn’t hard to guess that this ‘urgency’ clause to acquire land has been used as conveniently as a tube well, by local governments across the country, to speed up an otherwise slow process of land acquisition. That too, without much cost and crackle.
“In the last twenty years, almost all the land acquired by the government in Greater Noida has been done through the use of section 17 (the urgency clause),” says Akhilesh Singh, Deputy Chief Executive Officer of the Greater Noida Authority to B&E. Since mid-April, courts have struck down the UP government’s acquisition of a total of 433 hectare of land acquired through such means in Greater Noida. Many similar cases are pending in courts.
Source : IIPM Editorial, 2012.
An Initiative of IIPM, Malay Chaudhuri
and Arindam Chaudhuri (Renowned Management Guru and Economist).
For More IIPM Info, Visit below mentioned IIPM articles.
IIPM Best B School India
Management Guru Arindam Chaudhuri
Rajita Chaudhuri-The New Age WomanIIPM's Management Consulting Arm-Planman Consulting
IIPM Prof. Arindam Chaudhuri on Internet Hooliganism
Arindam Chaudhuri: We need Hazare's leadership
Professor Arindam Chaudhuri - A Man For The Society....
IIPM: Indian Institute of Planning and Management
An Initiative of IIPM, Malay Chaudhuri
and Arindam Chaudhuri (Renowned Management Guru and Economist).
For More IIPM Info, Visit below mentioned IIPM articles.
IIPM Best B School India
Management Guru Arindam Chaudhuri
Rajita Chaudhuri-The New Age WomanIIPM's Management Consulting Arm-Planman Consulting
IIPM Prof. Arindam Chaudhuri on Internet Hooliganism
Arindam Chaudhuri: We need Hazare's leadership
Professor Arindam Chaudhuri - A Man For The Society....
IIPM: Indian Institute of Planning and Management
