Land Acquisition in India

By Vinod Varshney 

Bhatta Parsaul in western UP saw violent protests by people against land acquisition for a housing project without giving proper compensation. In Gorakhpur, farmers obstructed takeover of land for a nuclear plant. Villagers in Kaler Ghuman, Punjab, refused to part with their land for any non-agricultural purpose. The Maharashtra government had to withdraw proposals for setting up Special Economic Zones (SEZs) on account of people’s stiff resistance. Rewari farmers too are up in arms against land acquisition. Singur made history of sorts when the affected farmers’ cyclonic  protests blasted away the 32-year old Left government into the Bay. 

The land acquisition issue, mushrooming agitation by farmers all over the country,  is  creating an explosive situation requiring the Union government’s urgent attention,  especially in the context of the 12^th Plan which envisages 100 million new jobs in ten years.  Unless this burgeoning conflict is resolved peacefully and huge chunks of land are made available for various projects, all our development plans will be in jeopardy. 

Currently land acquisition is done according to the Land Acquisition Act of 1894 which has been amended 17 times since. The last amendment in 1984 empowered the government to take over land even for private enterprises, and this dispossessed millions of farmers of their basic means of livelihood.  Forty percent of the affected are tribals, 20 percent dalits and 20 percent other backward castes. The rise of Maoists is attributed to massive displacement of tribals. So the Government has a mammoth problem to address. 

The government’s efforts to sort out the complex issues of land acquisition on the one hand and resettlement and rehabilitation of the affected on the other are not made easy by the opportunistic attitude of politicians. A vocal group fiercely opposes any land acquisition for private companies. For them production of goods and services, creation of jobs and paying of taxes cannot be said public interest! Another bogey they raise is that 80 percent of people that would be affected must certify that the proposed project is in public interest!!  This is outright baloney. More contentious is the question: who should be compensated—only land owners or all those deemed to be affected by it. 

Another difficult part of land acquisition is, determination of fair compensation. The proposed Act provides for four times the market price. But the market price shoots up the moment the  project is approved.  It is a vicious cycle.

The point all concerned should remember is that provisions of the new Act should not prove self-defeating. If we have to remain competitive internationally, we have to see that cost of production remains absolute minimum. Exorbitant land prices can only make us lose out in the world market and depress Indian economy irrevocably. 

Arguments have been made against acquisition of multi-crop agricultural land. A blanket ban would exclude all such areas from the pale of industrial development.  It would do lasting injustice to the people of the area.  

Thus there are several dimensions to the land acquisition conundrum.  A balanced approach should see that no stumbling block is created in the overall development of the country. Law makers must be pragmatic and think about our people’s interests, their future; they should not go by opportunistic rhetoric.  
(The article was first published in "Lokayat" magazine, published from New Delhi, India)