Even as farmers protest land acquisitions across India, the Union Ministry of Rural Development (MoRD) unveiled the draft national land acquisition and rehabilitation and resettlement bill. Released on July 29, the bill promises higher compensation to land owners and incorporates comprehensive rehabilitation package for even the landless people affected by takeovers. The draft has also introduced certain safeguards against forcible land acquisition for private companies.
The MoRD minister, Jairam Ramesh, in his foreword to the draft bill claimed the proposed law seeks to balance the need for facilitating land acquisition for various public purposes with the concerns of farmers and people whose livelihood depends on the land acquired. The bill merges the land acquisition law with rehabilitation and resettlement (R&R) provisions; the UPA government had earlier proposed two separate bills. Ramesh justified the merger, saying resettlement and rehabilitation “necessarily follow land acquisition and that not combining the two laws risks neglect of R&R”.
Recognises rights of landless
The draft bill proposes compensation six times the circle rates for rural land owners and twice the circle rate for urban land owners. The compensation package introduces a subsistence allowance of Rs 3,000 per month for a year and an inflation-indexed annuity of Rs 2,000 for 20 years for both land owners and those losing livelihood (see ‘What the bill promises’).
Member of the National Advisory Council (NAC), Harsh Mander, welcomed the bill, saying it incorporates most of the recommendations of NAC. “It is for the first time in India we are recognising that affected persons include the landless who work on the fields,” says Mander. The compensation provisions were decided by NAC after broad discussions. “Our observation was that land is generally registered at one-third the price of market value, and to give a better deal to farmers we proposed a value six times the original market value,” says Mander.
But activists protesting land acquisition are not placated. The National Alliance of People’s Movements (NAPM) says land should be taken only on lease so that the land owners, who may be tribals or farmers, are not alienated from their land and can have a regular income in the form of lease payment. Madhuresh Kumar of NAPM says the bill does not offer a good deal to farmers displaced by irrigation projects. Those displaced by the Narmada project were given 2 hectares (ha); the new bill proposes only 0.4 ha, he says.
Public purpose v private interest
The most contentious provision in the draft bill is the one defining “public purpose”. It says public purpose for which land is acquired would include infrastructure and defence projects, industries and urbanisation.
Kumar says the definition of public purpose covers almost everything from building educational institutions to airports to mining, in which private companies are major players. These companies have no public purpose, and acquisition is for profit making, he says. Dharmender Singh, spokesperson of farmers’ organisation Bharatiya Kisan Union (BKU), says that the term public purpose is still not well-defined. “For instance, for the Yamuna Expressway in Uttar Pradesh, the government gave away five land parcels to a developer as payment for constructing the highway. Would you consider this swap as public purpose?” Singh asks (see ‘Road to disaster’, Down To Earth, June 15, 2011).
Mander, also expresses concern over the definition of infrastructure projects which allows land acquisition for housing for “such income groups”. Not defining “such” may allow entry of real estate developers, says Mander.
Industry chambers CII, however, hailed the draft bill for including infrastructure and industry in the public purpose clause. It now wants the clause expanded to empower the state to acquire land even for potential use by private sector-led industrial, commercial and institutional projects.
The bill, however, provides safeguards against indiscriminate land acquisitions. It requires states to set up a committee under the chief secretary to approve and determine if land acquisition is for public purpose (see ‘Safeguards against forcible takeovers’).
We are a voice to you; you have been a support to us. Together we build journalism that is independent, credible and fearless. You can further help us by making a donation. This will mean a lot for our ability to bring you news, perspectives and analysis from the ground so that we can make change together.