In The Works...
- Government to acquire land, "public purpose" to be redefined
- Land acquisition only after getting written consent of 80 per cent of landowners
- Monitoring authority to be set up at the Centre and states to ensure compliance
- Payment component split into part-cash-down and remaining in annuity for 33 years
- Post development of land, a part to be returned to original owners for use as fit
- Rights of dwellers without land to be recognised and compensated
***
A 20-ft-wide nallah (drain) divides the villages of Shahberi in Noida Extension and Dundahera in Ghaziabad. But these two places in the same state are light years apart when it comes to land acquisition. Ghaziabad allowed the developers to negotiate directly with farmers to acquire land for the 360-acre Crossings Republik township. The lucky farmers who held out have benefited from the rise in prices, from Rs 4 lakh per bigha in 2006 to over Rs 30 lakh per bigha.
In contrast, Shahberi residents had no such option. The Greater Noida Industrial Development Authority (GNIDA) used its emergency powers to notify that land of 271 villages be taken over for industrial township development. The recent Supreme Court verdict—that land acquired under the emergency provision for industrial development cannot be diverted for residential purposes—came as a big relief for 90 per cent of the Shahberi villagers, who did not accept the state's payment of Rs 7.11 lakh per bigha. Similar rulings in the nearby Patwari village have returned land to the farmers.
There's more to come: so far a dozen villages in the Noida Extension area have gone to court and more are likely to follow suit—a development that has put a question mark on the fate of thousands who had booked flats in the upcoming projects. Given the spate of agitations, sometimes taking a violent form, this latest saga could well be taken as a microcosm of the land issues confronting several state governments, including Karnataka, Orissa and Maharashtra.
|
At the heart of the new draft bill being worked out is a redefinition of "public purpose" so as to avoid questionable acquisition being thus justified, Noida Extension being the latest example. "State governments have unfortunately used their powers to change the definition of public purpose," says Arun Maira, member, Planning Commission. This will now change, says NAC member N.C. Saxena, who is working with the ministry on the drafting of the bill. "For this, 'public purpose' is being clearly redefined," he says.
As things stand, public purpose driving land acquisition will be put into three compartments. The first would cover government acquisition of land for roads, irrigation and so on, the classic public purpose. Then comes land acquired for public purposes that might later change ownership to private entities (like SEZs, for example). Finally, there's the acquisition of land for a private project, industrial or residential. In the second and third categories, a consent of a majority of the landowners—80 per cent is the number doing the rounds—is essential.
Then comes the issue of compensation, which will be a major focus of the new bill. Haryana's model of compensation—part cash payment, 33-year annuity payments and a slice of developed land or employment in industrial projects—is currently finding considerable support, including by Rahul Gandhi. But it too has flaws. "Though the Haryana model has some progressive features like annuity payments, it also has several weaknesses, like it does not protect the poor comprehensively as it is designed to facilitate rapid industrialisation," says civil society activist and NAC member Harsh Mander.
|
Similarly, the drafters of the bill are yet to get a fix on whether a compulsory rehabilitation policy should be enforced, or if it should be left to market forces. Hopefully, the new legislation taking shape will ensure a voice for the farm and forestland owners and adequate compensation for all displaced people.
In the wake of the SC strictures, Rama Raman, CEO, GNIDA, assures, "In future we will hear village-dwellers' views and objections (provided under Section 5A) before proceeding with land acquisition." But that is no consolation for those who lost fertile land and crops. As developments in UP reveal, despite a new compensation package being promised (but not implemented so far), farmers are not too sure they will get their dues from state authorities, who made a huge profit through auction of land.
Government officials in Noida justify this on the grounds that infrastructure development like roads, water supply, sewerage system and other facilities for an integrated industrial township is costly business. If the land acquisition is done as per a master plan as in the case of Noida and Greater Noida, then the infrastructure development is better, unlike in Gurgaon, which lacks planning and proper infrastructure. "Given the problem of getting clear land titles, land acquisition by the government is the best," says Getamber Anand, MD, ATS Group, and vice-president, Confederation of Real Estate Developers' Associations of India (CREDAI).
Despite the best of intentions, the devil lies in the implementation. Land, as we know well, is a state subject. It remains to be seen how the states react to the bill; they can be spoilers. That's why the draft bill envisages a monitoring authority both at the central and state level. Even the drafters of the bill agree that these would be "enabling and not compelling" provisions in the final law. So, there's nothing stopping West Bengal from sticking to its line that there will be no state government role in buying land for industry. Given that it's such an emotive—and politically loaded issue—expect more fine-tuning ahead.
| ALSO IN THIS STORY |
NOIDA EXTENSION: LAND ACQUISITION Of the farmer, the builder and home owner that won't be |
AUTHORS: LOLA NAYAR
TAGS: LAND | GOVERNMENT-GOVERNANCE-GOVERNMENT POLICIES ETC | REALTY
SECTION: BUSINESS | NATIONAL
PLACES: NOIDA | UTTAR PRADESH
Translate
JUL 24, 2011 07:16 PM 8 | One the Land aquisition becomes las, politicians will have to find even more cunning ways of making quick money. AND TRUST ME - THEY WILL~! |
JUL 24, 2011 01:47 PM 7 | The 1894 Land Acquisition Act is in existence for almost a century & a quarters. The British & subsequently the governments of free India made excellent use of the law. Modern India's infrastructure, whatever it is, was built through honest & transparent use of this law. Rail & surface roads, huge steel plants, power plants & whatever public purpose infrastructures we see today were built on land acquired through use of this law. As far as I know there was hardly agitation , let alone a national debate over land acquisition. Even today land acquisition is not an issue nor subject of agitation when proper 'public purpose' is served. Even today in West-Bengal - a place considered to be the incubator of today's anti-land acquisition agitation - thousands of acres of land is being acquired for building roads, railways ,power plants, airports. These land related activities of the governments find hardly any mention even in local media. Within the period of last 2/3 decades land , particularly suburban land, has became the fastest growing asset class. Value appreciation of prime land in major metropolitan cities & their suburbia is faster than that of gold. One prime contributor to this phenomenon is the ever expanding middle class with growing purchasing power. Private sector corporations would naturally try to cash on this asset class. With their all encompassing hold over the the governments of the day , misuse of the 'Public Purpose' - an expandable subjective vocabulary - became the rule rather than the exception. Government's pre-occupation & prioritization land acquisition over other governance issues , poverty alleviation or corruption in public life for example , is an aberration. So bringing the business of land acquisition in any-whichever form in the forefront of national discourse is a ploy to serve private purpose rather than public purpose. ( It may be noted that a pro-active anti-corruption law did not followed up with such alacrity). That being the sate of affairs the best thing to do is government to exit from this land acquisition business altogether except for very narrow & well defined 'public purpose. This 80 % , 70% business is beside the point as land acquisition by governments any form will be misused. Or possibly, the 1984 law should be amended with strict & narrow definition of 'Public Purpose'. |
JUL 24, 2011 11:24 AM 6 | We have enough laws to protect the poor. |
JUL 24, 2011 09:57 AM 5 | It is a sorry state of affair,where Government is accused by the Supreme Court for dishonesty (use of emergency clause) with its own citizen, farmers.Nitin is right builders paid hefty ammount to the kith and kin of Mayawati.The huge difference between the agriculture and residential land is the root cause of this problem.Why Government call private builder for construction of houses when development authorities with staff exists.You may understand the level of income at the level of Chief Minister from these murky deals in the name of industial development in which a petty engineer Arun Mishra property is in thousands of crores (CBI reports). Why we always talk about the increased compensation for land and not the price check for the flats/houses after all home is the basic necessity and their buyers are also Indian citizen.You can draft any policy but if the Government is corrupt there is no hope. |
JUL 23, 2011 06:55 PM 4 | The recent Court order on land acquisition further question the concept of 'eminent domain' and near absolute power of discretion in the execution of authority. The discussions on the proposed draft stuck around three points-land percentage states should acquire determination of the compensation rate and fate of those who are indirectly dependent on land for livelihood. Hardly, there can be a uniform policy for compensation because land valuation is different at different places and dependent on many variables like- land use by the present and future occupants, level of skill of the dispossessed and future settlement cost. |
PERMALINK
LIKE (0)
DISLIKE (0)
REPORT ABUSE
Posts
